|
1.0 THEME: EMPLOYMENT RECRUITMENT
Research with Discouraged Job Seekers revealed a distinction between what is needed to get a job and what is needed to do a job successfully. To meet our goal of getting a clear picture of the process that participants went through to end up as Discouraged Job Seekers, we felt it was important to separate these two aspects. Employment services counselors can help a person change and improve their ability to be recruited for a job. We therefore refer to all the aspects of getting a job as Employment Recruitment: later we discuss those aspects of ‘doing a job’ in the section entitled Job Properties. We define Employment Recruitment as the job search process that begins with how the employer recruits for a position and ends with a person being hired. The phases of employment recruitment are: 1. Identifying what jobs are available Summary of participants’Employment Recruitment barriers
DESCRIPTION OF EMPLOYMENT RECRUITMENT BARRIERS
Not knowing how to ‘get in the door’ of potential employers was particularly discouraging to the participants we spoke to. They felt that if the employer could get a sense of the skills and strengths they possess, they might be offered a job.
1.1 IDENTIFYING WHAT JOBS ARE AVAILABLEThe statistic that 85%[1]of jobs are filled without being advertised was particularly daunting and disheartening to our participants. As discussed in other areas of this report their social networks usually do not have likely job contacts.
The lack of communication with people who are employed, as described in the social barriers, had a particularly profound effect in this theme – how to find out about jobs.
Participants we spoke to also knew or found out after the fact that many of the jobs advertised were not actually available.
Employment counselors recommend creating a new resume for each job application. Participants found this particularly demoralizing when they went through this process for a position that had actually been filled already.
Job ads were confusing, unclear regarding requirements versus ideal qualifications. Due to their particular challenge or disability, some found newspaper ads difficult, e.g., the different size fonts. For others the overall lack of clarity in any ad (through the job bank, on line, etc) was frustrating. The use of a wide variety of terms to describe what the employer is looking for i.e., ‘required’, ‘preferred’, ‘desired’ led the participants to not know whether or not to apply for positions.
At times participants had the essence of the skills required for jobs, but not the specific ones named. They did not apply, feeling it was a waste of time. However, additional information supplied by others let them know they may have been offered the position.
Comments about the lack of clear information for position requirements were frequent.
Participants felt that the process did not allow the employer to identify who the best person was for the job
Many of our participants had years of experience but due to changing job criteria were barred from being considered for jobs that they had either successfully completed previously or knew they had the requirements for.
Others were bewildered by requirements that did not seem in line with the positions’ tasks.
Diane had struggled with math and geography and was unable to get her GED, and the necessary cosmetology certificate from the community college.
1.2 SUBMITTING RESUMESIdentifying the best way to present your self in a resume is an area that was seen as very important and also a very confusing one. Those who had gone to employment support counselors were given different advice from different agencies. Most of our participants had a significant gap in their work history due to unplanned hardships such as recovering from car accidents, and care giving for an elderly relative. Such events, sometimes more than one occurring in rapid succession, had taken most participants away from the workplace for a considerable time. Their difficulty in knowing how to address the gap in their resume was frequently mentioned as a barrier to feeling confident about their job seeking skills and potential to be considered for a job.
The applicant being under qualified, possibly not having the credentials for the job is one side of the challenges identified by Fred above. Being over qualified is the other side. A number of participants we interviewed had extensive qualifications in a wide variety of vocations. Choosing to exclude a number of these qualifications in a resume is often referred to as ‘dumbing down’. Deciding to do so - to remove recognition of qualifications that had required years of commitment and hard work was painful.
At times it was still an unsuccessful strategy.
Employment counselors recommend each job application should have an individually developed resume[2].
For those who had spent years being unemployed, and had learned that the hiring often is not open to new applicants, this expectation was not just exhausting, but wearing away their trust in employers We had the opportunity to see many of the participants’ resumes. Many participants had significant talents and skills. Many had applied to hundreds of places over many years. The apparent loss to the business community is regrettable. This ongoing process of putting out considerable energy and getting no recognition and no real sense of interest in their skills and talents was a part of the process that led participants to become ‘Discouraged Job Seekers’, rather than optimistic job seekers. The interview process was at times frustrating for participants as many saw a disconnection between what was asked in the interview and their perception or experience of what a job entailed.
Jennifer had communication problems, but was not applying for jobs that required significant communication skills – she was more highly technically skilled than many in her field, but knew she did not do well in interviews.
The applicant not being told how to prepare for the interview, e.g., being asked apparently irrelevant questions, was a part of the interview process that did not allow participants to feel that the employer had the opportunity to see them as the best person for the position.
This may seem to reflect how many of us feel about job interviews. However for people who feel as if they are in a worse position from the beginning, it is particularly difficult.
The specifics of how interviews were conducted struck us as being a barrier that could be addressed by employers fairly easily, if they were given feedback and support about how to do so. Being interviewed by more than one person for people who are not socially skilled was an extremely negative experience.
The information asked in interviews confused some participants and was contrary to helping them communicate the skills they brought to the position. Questions that were overly general such as “Tell us a bit about yourself” left some baffled regarding the amount of information to give.
We were told of employers asking vague questions such as “If you were a cereal what kind would you be?” For people who were already emotionally fragile, sensing that they probably answered those questions ‘wrong’ reduced their confidence for the rest of the interview and troubled them even years later. They felt not doing well with such questions put them in such a state of confusion and panic that the employer was missing the opportunity for them to clearly demonstrate what skills they did have.
Participants were asked to produce documentation that they weren’t informed about prior to the interview. This led them to feeling that they did not present themselves well.
Going through the resume submission and interview process and finding out that the person hired had special influence with the employer led to a strong a sense of cynicism. Due to the small and interconnected nature of Kings County, participants often found out who was offered positions they had been interviewed for.
The skills needed to get an employer’s initial interest, e.g., having excellent writing skills as demonstrated via submitting good resumes and cover letters, and communicating effectively during an interview, are skills that did not seem to be needed for many of the positions that participants were interested in. According to the Labor Market reports, they had marketable skills that employers seek, but not those that are focused on in the current employment recruitment process. The lack of training on the job or apprentice programs that participants could enroll in, due either to the total lack of availability of these programs or their not having the appropriate credentials, frustrated them. Participants sensed that if the employer could see them performing the specific job related tasks well, they would be more likely to be considered for a job. One participant enrolled in a community college certificate course specifically in order to obtain this experience
For those we interviewed whose job searches extended for years, their lack of receiving any indication that their applications had been received and/or considered was devastating. Many had sent hundreds of resumes and received not one response. It felt as if all their energy was going into nothing, what they called a “void”. The negative impact was even more so if they attended interviews and were never informed of the employer’s decision. “The Void” we refer to is a phenomenon that a number of people involved in employment services are aware of, and recognize the negative impact it has on job seekers.[3] In our recommendations we make several simple suggestions that could address some aspects of this cause of significant distress for job seekers, particularly those who have been looking for years. Not knowing how their personal information was being dealt with by the employer also led to anxiety and a feeling of vulnerability.
“The Void” we identify seemed to be part of a trend. Not long ago, it was standard to receive an acknowledgement of receipt of the resume, and receive a phone call or letter informing one of the success or not of a job interview. On their side, employers tell us they are overwhelmed by the number of applications they receive for jobs they advertise and that they need a way to winnow down the numbers before dealing with the individual applicants. They felt they did not have time to individually respond to each application. However, the impact on vulnerable people who have few supports of not receiving any acknowledgement for their efforts (as we discuss in ‘social networks) is profound. Going to an interview and receiving positive feedback during the interview, then not being offered the job, with no explanation is particularly distressing and confusing.
Not having any feedback regarding the application and interview process led to mental and physical health problems and feeling more and more hopeless in their job search.
Paula had gone to three interviews in short succession and did not hear back from any employer that had interviewed her. When the time passed and she realized she was not being offered a position, she decided to let the employers know how offended she was. She spoke to them directly to ask for specifics of why she didn’t get the job. One had even called from the golf course: she realized she would not be considered for employment by them again, but was desperate to communicate her feeling of being treated so carelessly. The Cumulative Effect All the factors discussed above combined to lead participants to feel more and more discouraged. Not knowing what and how to change their approaches to deal with these parts of job seeking resulted in a number of those we interviewed withdrawing completely from the job hunt process, despite unquestionably still wanting to work. They had tried every which way they and the professionals they consulted with knew to communicate their skills and talents to the employer and felt they failed miserably. They had started by believing that they were the right person for the job and ended with no job offers, and extremely low self esteem. One participant who had been actively looking for work for almost three years said:
Eva had retrained for a number of practical skills that are needed, but over the years the qualifications kept changing, and she had to move on to find other jobs.
Jennifer voices what we heard from many: in spite of wanting work, being flexible, and using professional employment supports, looking for jobs without success leads to a feeling of hopelessness.
RESPONSE FROM EMPLOYERS AND OTHERSEmployers we spoke to were willing to consider other ways of recruiting. The concerns they had that would need to be taken into consideration were:
According to the employers we spoke to, some issues that participants believed would exclude them from consideration did not seem overly challenging. In particular, employers made helpful suggestions to assist participants in dealing with significant gaps in employment. The employers we spoke to also did not seem overly concerned with other issues that participants had identified as major barriers, such as not meeting specific requirements. When we made suggestions about easy techniques that would help deal with “The Void” the employers we spoke to were keen to incorporate such suggestions. They are included in General Recommendations. Two of the employers asked for their input to be included in our research. We believe this positive attitude can be built on for implementation of some recommendations. It is important that recommendations reflect consideration of the needs of both job seekers and employers. Regarding the barriers the participants identified, employment services workers agreed that there was an increasing level of credentials expected. One worker reminded us that the current Community College system which requires Grade 12 as a standard for enrolment, used to be the ‘vocational school’ system. That system was intended to train people who had difficulty with academics for trades: the system that has replaced it requires academic ability. One of our primary mandates was to communicate the voices of participants. In order to accurately indicate recommendations made by participants, we have broken the recommendations down into two sections: Participants and Employers, employment support workers, and the researchers. At times there is repetition, but we believe it is important to distinguish the voices of the participants from others.
Participants made suggestions about what would help and also told us about what they found successful. Participants were as overwhelmed with the energy and time it took to apply for the number of jobs available as employers were by the applications they receive when they posted jobs. Participants need help with the job ads to clarify the requirements vs. desired qualifications, or what the exact job is. Many found the ads confusing, cluttered and difficult to identify exactly what was needed. They felt someone who has experience with the local economy and employers and could help decode the ads would be helpful.
Employers we spoke to were open to the concept of an interviewee bringing in a support person. Very few participants had been given such opportunities locally. Barrier 1.1: Identifying what jobs are available.
Barrier 1.2: Submitting Resumes Employers were critical of the sameness of resumes apparently produced by employment support services. Employers emphasized that a resume to demonstrate the matching strengths with the job was essential. Submitting a resume as a step in the process appears to be integral when a regular job search is occurring. However, creativity and flexibility about its relevance and importance needs to be considered. That is, employers need to ask themselves if they can find ways to screen applicants in a more successful way and employment support people need to hear from employers exactly what it is that they're looking for. Barrier 1.3: Being Interviewed The interview process is one that we believe could be revised significantly and relatively easily. Unless there are organizational barriers such as a process mandated from a head office or a collective agreement. We ask employers to consider what it is they are looking for in an employee and use the interview time to assess those skills. Here are some considerations for employers: 1. To reduce anxiety: A variety of approaches could help people challenged by the interview process, e.g., personality traits such as being more of a ‘doer’ rather than a ‘talker’, conditions such as autism; low self-esteem.
2. To ensure the right skills are being assessed:
3. To find out the strengths of character/qualities that lead to hiring good employees:
4. Alternative ways to find out skills that fit the employer
Barrier 1.4: Finding out if you got the job or not.
This area was the one that we believe can be relatively easily addressed and could remedy some of the experience of “The Void” that is such a negative factor for Discouraged Job Seeker.
SUMMARYThe area of Employment Recruitment appears to offer the greatest opportunity for adaptation to facilitate removal of barriers that create the sense of discouragement that we heard from participants. It also appears to be an area that adaptations could allow successful hiring of people who want to work but whose strengths are being missed. Adaptation of the way employers recruit may lead to more successful matching. Clarity in job ads, more job-skill specific interview/screening processes may lead to more effective and efficient processes for both the employer and job seeker. Employers recognizing the importance of acknowledging receipt of applications, and informing applicants of their policies regarding such applications by making minor technical adaptation could help. A coordinated team approach of Employment Services workers, interested employers, and a representative of job seekers could develop recommendations to be implemented in Kings County. Peter had worked for an organization that specialized in working with people with challenges. He had been away from work for over two decades due to mental health issues, addictions and time for rehabilitation to become stable. The initial interview with the potential employer was set up by one of his support workers. The employer had his resume and they were made aware that he had some mental health issues before meeting him. He was told that he was going in for an initial chat to see if they should move forward with a formal interview. He therefore was more relaxed. It was brief: they asked him some specific questions about his experience with the work required in the position. They then took him on a tour of the production facility. They asked him about whether he thought he could fit and had a discussion about where he would fit in. In the second interview he was trained by one of the other workers on the job he would be doing. At the end of that time he was told he had the job. The only adaptation he needed was for the employer to let him go to his regular medication adjustment appointments without deducting pay. He worked there for over two years until he lost the job due to reduced work availability. Since then he has been unable to find any similar supportive employment, works at piecework when he can, and earns significantly less than minimum wage. Clearly he is a dedicated, committed worker with the work ethic employers told us they had a hard time finding. Given Peter’s extremely challenging background, we feel his experience with this organization’s recruitment process reflected a significant difference in outcome from the experience of many we spoke to. It would seem to follow that if other employers recruited workers with similar creativity many of the participants we interviewed could find gainful employment and employers the dedicated workers they need. [1]HRSDC Website: http://www.jobsetc.gc.ca/eng Back to Table of Contents |
 |
© Pathways to Work Research Project.
Banner photo by Linda Davidson, Side photo by HIRATA Yasuyuki
Banner photo by Linda Davidson, Side photo by HIRATA Yasuyuki
The Pathways to Work Research Project is funded under the Canada-Nova Scotia Labour Market Agreement. 