Tuesday, July 16, 2013

"Stable Work History"

That requirement is another way for employers to fuck over the unemployed, especially people who have been victimized via age age discrimination.

I had some damned moron who runs a local tutoring service DEMAND that I resubmit a resume so that it was chronological instead of functional/combination. I was going to be DAMNED that I was going to do that for some shitty little "job" where they might work me a couple of hours a week, and I let her know it was discriminatory to demand dates of employment (and presumably dates of graduation).

I didn't bother with it.

Last month, a much further-reaching New York law went into effect, banning employers from having any job requirement that could disparately impact the unemployed, unless the employer can demonstrate that the requirement is substantially job-related. A "very stable work history" could very possibly fall into that category, according to Emsellem.

For while certain skills and years of experience in a particular field are relevant requirements for a position, it's not as obvious how "stable work history" is a bonafide qualification.

"There may be some job where it's absolutely critical that they have a stable work history, whatever that means," says Emsellem. "But what jobs are those exactly? What are we talking about?"

It means never having been unemployed, never working for more than one or two employers over a work history.

I guess since I have worked for perhaps 30 to 35 different employers over the course of my working career, I wouldn't count. That despite the fact some of those "jobs" were part-time that enabled me to get my graduate degree. I held one full-time position 12 years, another one five years, a part-time position eight years, a private school job two years, a public school district six years total, and my current employers for one and three years, respectively. No stable employment history there.

No comments: