Management Consultancy
Associate - Training & Development
+2 Others

Thread Started by #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!!
9th April 2018 From India, Mumbai
These mindsets are there because there is no dearth of candidates seeking employment.
Change of mindsets is a difficult process and it takes time.
9th April 2018 From India, Pune
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).
10th April 2018 From India, Mumbai
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.
11th April 2018 From India, Mumbai
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 .
Vinayak Nagarkar
11th April 2018 From India, Mumbai
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".
11th April 2018 From India, Mumbai
Reply (Add What You Know) Start New Discussion

Cite.Co - is a repository of information created by your industry peers and experienced seniors. Register Here and help by adding your inputs to this topic/query page.
Prime Sponsor: TALENTEDGE - Certification Courses for career growth from top institutes like IIM / XLRI direct to device (online digital learning)

About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2019 Cite.Co™