No Tags Found!

pammy0504
Few days back, one of my clients had asked me NOT to share the cv’s of the candidates who are on sabbatical or being laid off or unemployed or with a career gap. I was taken aback since was unable to understand the thought process behind this decision. How could an ‘unemployed’ status tag a candidate as a non-hire material?
I believe that performance, capability and talent have nothing to do with someone currently out of work. Reasons of career gap could be anything but in no possible circumstances it lessens an individual skills and talent. What is candidate’s fault if his process gets ramped down or if his company decides to lay off- candidate’s performance has nothing to do with such decisions. Even I am on a short sabbatical, does this make me inferior or short of talent? Why this mindset? Also, even if Organizations consider the non working candidates they offer them no hike or a minimal hike which is absolutely un-fair.
My question to all the HR Leaders- can’t we bring the change & be the change? Can’t we free our recruiting team from unconscious biases? Can’t we deliberate and find out solutions to remove such dogmas which can be a cloud on the horizon for our future generation? Can’t we give them a fair chance?
Over to you Guys!!

From India, Mumbai
nathrao
3131

These mindsets are there because there is no dearth of candidates seeking employment. Change of mindsets is a difficult process and it takes time.
From India, Pune
pammy0504
This change would take time to be accepted by recruiters / companies. This is one of the major factor which demotivates a candidate who wants to start working after a break (for whatever reason).
From India, Mumbai
KK!HR
1534

Perhaps, the client may be having a feeling that those on the bench are second best, so why bother when fresh and super good candidates are available. As rightly said above, the problem is that of plenty being available. So there has to be some screening out candidates at the threshold itself, just to limit the numbers. Most organisations have some such criteria, like those who have earlier applied need not apply again. Such biases and prejudices are prevalent in the industry.
From India, Mumbai
Nagarkar Vinayak L
619

Dear HR colleague,
I wish I agreed with you more.
What should matter for recruiter is the talent and capability relevant to the role possessed by the candidate and should only be elimination /selection point.
Any other considerations, should not be allowed to influence our decisions in selecting .
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR-Consultant

From India, Mumbai
PRABHAT RANJAN MOHANTY
588

Dear Pammy,
I understand your concern and issues over the matter. Your concern will be justified when you shall remain the employer and you have the choice to follow.
But in this matter, the choice and option of the client to be abided since you are working on their behalf, everyone has got choice and policy.
An practical example is cited below to understand the things: two years back my borthers candidature was cancelled being selected for the post of GM on policy ground " that the establishment was owned by his employer 10 years back, later sold out".

From India, Mumbai
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.





Contact Us Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2024 CiteHR ®

All Copyright And Trademarks in Posts Held By Respective Owners.