This isn't a fair hiring practice, it might work for some but it makes it extremely difficult for others to find employment. I know you don't care about the people that apply for your job. And I know you're only interested in finding workers but Hiring like this hurts a lot of people, especially people that come from backgrounds that are dissimilar to yours. It's also not fair to those who's personal network doesn't include people doing the type of work that someone might want to do. Networking for a job isn't an efficient or consistent way to find employment. You should seriously reconsider hiring applicants and stop being lazy by letting your employees refer their friends and family.
Seeking referrals from friends, past colleagues, shoot even strangers you meet in your journey looking for a new job is the number one strategy for people looking for a job to find one and great ones at that. Unfortunately posting jobs receiving hundreds if not thousands of resumes do not help people who are complete strangers get noticed by hiring manager. The same strategies we teach employers we offer to to job seekers in this free book a.co/d/bE3Z6aP (.$99 goes to workforce development programs) If you are struggling to find a great job and career it's packed with every strategy know to humans on how to solve that problem and get a great career going.
So, the incel culture of tech gets perpetuated. Indoctrinated is such a great word! And since incels see women as inferior, they wouldn’t be “friends” with them anyway. So, referral based hiring has disparate impact in some industries, doesn’t it? That creates an EEOC liability, doesn’t it? Or maybe, employees don’t make it through their first year because it’s a hostile work environment? INCEL culture, but continue to blame the employees. I argue this is a chicken and egg problem. However, if that’s how they view the problem, is it somewhere I want to work anyway? Probably not! Repeating something often doesn’t make it true. And us out here in the fringes have time to complain about your video… but somehow still looking at work content! Which then debunks the next claim of laziness and “just not having what it takes.” Another example: Forced arbitration clauses. I took arbitration in college, I’m very, very good at it, and I would also prefer arbitration! The difference is, my employer needs a lawyer, the lawyer will have no idea I’m well versed in it, and have been accumulating evidence for my case since day one. Why have I been accumulating it? One of the primary benefits of arbitration is “privacy.” Nothing about arbitration is part of public record. So, while my background gets inspected prior to accepting a job, the employer’s background is conveniently hidden, and by forcing me to sign an arbitration clause, they are TELLING me, “If we do something wrong, we don’t want the public to hold us accountable. But if you do something wrong, we can put it on your employment record.” They are suspect simply by enforcing a double standard as a condition of employment, and not allowing me to inspect their history prior to agreeing to this double standard. I can fairly accurately predict the abusive MO’s employers use(often very similar to each other.) I smile EVERY time I see it. But, not one employer has known that about me, because they make assumptions, and seriously underutilize me as a resource. From a business perspective, that just boggles the mind! It’s painful to watch: I have no ill will toward anyone. There is a selfish component as well: won’t my employment be more secure if the company does well? Will they do well if they underutilize their resources? All in all, I know this practice is common. I just wonder if you have actually considered the premise of the arguments provided.
This isn't a fair hiring practice, it might work for some but it makes it extremely difficult for others to find employment. I know you don't care about the people that apply for your job. And I know you're only interested in finding workers but Hiring like this hurts a lot of people, especially people that come from backgrounds that are dissimilar to yours. It's also not fair to those who's personal network doesn't include people doing the type of work that someone might want to do. Networking for a job isn't an efficient or consistent way to find employment. You should seriously reconsider hiring applicants and stop being lazy by letting your employees refer their friends and family.
Seeking referrals from friends, past colleagues, shoot even strangers you meet in your journey looking for a new job is the number one strategy for people looking for a job to find one and great ones at that.
Unfortunately posting jobs receiving hundreds if not thousands of resumes do not help people who are complete strangers get noticed by hiring manager.
The same strategies we teach employers we offer to to job seekers in this free book a.co/d/bE3Z6aP (.$99 goes to workforce development programs)
If you are struggling to find a great job and career it's packed with every strategy know to humans on how to solve that problem and get a great career going.
So, the incel culture of tech gets perpetuated. Indoctrinated is such a great word! And since incels see women as inferior, they wouldn’t be “friends” with them anyway. So, referral based hiring has disparate impact in some industries, doesn’t it? That creates an EEOC liability, doesn’t it?
Or maybe, employees don’t make it through their first year because it’s a hostile work environment? INCEL culture, but continue to blame the employees. I argue this is a chicken and egg problem. However, if that’s how they view the problem, is it somewhere I want to work anyway? Probably not!
Repeating something often doesn’t make it true. And us out here in the fringes have time to complain about your video… but somehow still looking at work content! Which then debunks the next claim of laziness and “just not having what it takes.”
Another example:
Forced arbitration clauses. I took arbitration in college, I’m very, very good at it, and I would also prefer arbitration! The difference is, my employer needs a lawyer, the lawyer will have no idea I’m well versed in it, and have been accumulating evidence for my case since day one.
Why have I been accumulating it?
One of the primary benefits of arbitration is “privacy.” Nothing about arbitration is part of public record. So, while my background gets inspected prior to accepting a job, the employer’s background is conveniently hidden, and by forcing me to sign an arbitration clause, they are TELLING me, “If we do something wrong, we don’t want the public to hold us accountable. But if you do something wrong, we can put it on your employment record.”
They are suspect simply by enforcing a double standard as a condition of employment, and not allowing me to inspect their history prior to agreeing to this double standard.
I can fairly accurately predict the abusive MO’s employers use(often very similar to each other.) I smile EVERY time I see it. But, not one employer has known that about me, because they make assumptions, and seriously underutilize me as a resource.
From a business perspective, that just boggles the mind! It’s painful to watch: I have no ill will toward anyone. There is a selfish component as well: won’t my employment be more secure if the company does well? Will they do well if they underutilize their resources?
All in all, I know this practice is common. I just wonder if you have actually considered the premise of the arguments provided.