Unemployment is an issue that is significantly gaining much concern. The cases of high level of unemployment have also been on the rise, in the recent times. This issue has led to many companies and employers putting on many restrictions to job seekers. Many companies and employers seeking employee are currently eliminating unemployed applicant. They cling on the belief that those already employed posses more skills compared to the unemployed.
Following a press report, Washington (AP) is among the companies that eliminating job aspirant simply because they are without a job. Lately, after the spread of news of the act, commissions like “Equal Employment Opportunity Commission” have stepped in, in an attempt to calm the situation.
This is in an effort to curb the approach that could go against centralized job favoritism laws. The commissioners at inquiring said they were looking into whether the act may have severe verdict to the minority races that always with the highest levels of unemployment. Spiggs, an official at the “Department of Labor,” insinuated that it could not be easy for the government to determine the extent of the setback. Most company failing to declare job post publicly has caused that hindrance.
Helen Norton, a professor at the university, admitted that various companies have publicized different jobs with strict constraint. Only those applicants with jobs currently could be given chances. The professor also purported that a number of employers were considering current job as an indication of an excellent work performance.
Norton added that such a connection was particularly unfound and a mere exaggeration. Current job did not necessarily provide quality work performance. Following a report in the previous year, there was a job enrollment advertisement from Sony Ericsson excluding the unemployed candidates. The company soon removed the constraint following media exposure. Barring the jobless candidate in getting job posts is uncreative as concluded.
The management sector possibly will have internal conflict following the report of the article. There could be misunderstanding among the management members. Considering the fact that they also receive different orders and guidelines for running companies from the employers, there could be some contradiction.
The employers and owners of the companies may give orders to the managerial not to enroll any unemployed candidate, while this is against the laws and policies against discrimination of the unemployed. The managerial staff in support of the policies and laws may clash with those against the policies and laws that protect the unemployed.
The management may perhaps deteriorate its performance following the policies against discrimination in enrolling the unemployed, in higher posts such as directorship, executives, or managerial. The article says that, according to the policies and laws protecting the unemployed, they should not be excluded from applying the jobs.
Those getting high ranks in employment, although earlier did not have any job, may luck some supervisory skills. Some vital administrative skills are acquired after one has had much exposure to a certain schedule for long. Therefore, it may be vitally necessary for one to be having a job initially that one can get a managerial post.
On the contrary, the high levels of unemployment being experienced currently can only be solved by creating more employment opportunities. Different companies in different sectors ought to find significant techniques of intensifying their activities. This in effect, will create openings to many unemployed and employed job seekers. The approach will not only be of assistance in solving unemployment, but also solve the problem of not including the unemployed in applying for the job.