Favoritism and the New Discrimination - Why We Need to Return to Qualifications-Based Employment and Chuck Political Correctness and Affirmative Action

There is much talk about the economy these days, and honestly the economy in the past few years has been a real roller-coaster ride.   However, a lot of economic issues are actually self-imposed by a society that has its priorities out of whack, and unfortunately I and many other middle-aged men (as well as a growing number of over-40ish women) have borne an unnecessary brunt of this nonsense.  What I am going to address here is going to be frank, it is going to offend some people's sensitivities, and it definitely will not be the "politically correct" thing to say, but I do not apologize for that.  It is my personal opinion that this so-called "political correctness" has done more harm than good, and it's time for it to go, as well as giving the people who invented that garbage a firm slap upside the head with a baseball bat.  As I write this, some of it mirrors my own frustrations and dissatisfaction with society as a whole, as I feel like at times I have been targeted because of my age, gender, and even faith at times - enough is enough!  Any rate, let us now move on to the discussion.

For me over the past 20 or so years, doing a resume is like trying to write a novel - it is lengthy, involved, and requires a lot of creativity to get people's attention.  It is hard to believe this, but in the past 20 years, I have had a total of over 40 jobs!  Yes, 40!  That amounts to on average 2 jobs per year.  Many of them - the majority actually - have been contract/temporary positions, and none have even lasted two years.  In the past couple of years, the story gets even worse - I have spent most of that time unemployed totally, and it seems like regardless of what I do I had issues getting work.  Some judgmental people would say that it is my fault, but the fact of the matter is most of those jobs ended involuntarily - I was laid off from several, others were short-term work that I had no choice in the length of time I stayed or when they cut me loose, and some were hit hard by the economy and couldn't afford the extra payroll expense, so it wasn't necessarily the employer's fault either in those cases.  Some others may say that it is my credentials - they would try to reason that I need more experience or education, etc.  However, a good look at my own skills and experience would blow that out of the water fast too.  And, as I talk to people, I see that I am not necessarily the only one - at this time, I have at least 5 friends who have been up against the same challenges, and I hear of more every day.  My own mother, as a matter of fact, is 66 years old, has an extensive and stellar work history as a CNA, yet as I speak now she is living on tomato sandwiches because no one will even talk to her about a position.  In all these cases - including mine - there are some common factors.  First, all of the people I mentioned are White.   Second, many of us are middle-aged or elderly.  Third, although the overwhelming majority of these people (including myself) are middle-aged males, I have also noticed that women over a certain age are being hit like this too - my sister-in-law, for one example, is in her 50's and has an impressive resume that includes even executive-level experience, yet no one talks to her either, and she is having to resort to living off her savings right now because she cannot collect benefits, and although she does have one job prospect, they are waiting forever to call her on it.  What in the Sam Hill is going on??

First, let me tell you about my own credentials.  I have 15 years of experience as an Administrative professional, and it has been overall a good history - the majority of my supervisors I have had say I am detailed, have a good work ethic, and am highly professional.   I also have a strong educational background - I have a BA degree, as well as a Paralegal Studies certificate, and I am currently in graduate school earning a Masters.  In my Administrative work, I have an extensive background in Mortgage and Title, as well as extensive law office experience.   Yet, many of the job applications I have submitted I don't even get a common courtesy of hearing back from, and it really bugs me.  With my level of experience and knowledge, some of these jobs should by all measures be in the proverbial bag for me, yet I haven't gotten into one yet.  I fail to understand why, until I started doing some research into it and what I discovered was disturbing - many of these employers end up hiring some 20-something young girl with a big bosom and shapely legs who doesn't even have half the experience, and generally what happens is that this new employee cannot do the job right, yet she keeps the job anyway.  Why?  It is pretty simple - the employers hiring her want a pretty face to ogle over, and could care less about someone who can get the job done.  That is a loaded allegation I know, but let's face it - I have seen that way too often.  Or, if it is a female manager, she will hire this young 20ish-something guy fresh out of college with no experience for a similar reason - yet, the job listings say you need this, and need that, and so many years experience of this or that, etc.   Interesting, to say the least.  That being said, let's talk about some other things I have noticed.

One thing that really chafes my shins is this idea of "mandatory credit checks" for jobs.  Seriously?  First off, what does a credit score have to do with your performance of the job?  Second, why do some jobs require stupid things like this for menial tasks (yes, I have heard of janitors having to pass credit checks to get a whopping $6 an hour - really??)?  I have this to say to employers who want to nose around in your credit history for a job consideration - perhaps if you would loosen up a little and hire good people in the first place, you idiots, perhaps it wouldn't be necessary.  Secondly, if you would have given those people you are punishing work in the first place, perhaps they would have had the income to avoid credit issues - duh!!!!  So, some of these managers need to stop looking at their employees' boobs and butts, lusting over them, and stop punishing skilled workers with minutiae like credit checks - the economy might improve if maybe some unqualified management in these companies was replaced.  However, common sense was never a prerequisite for managerial perks in Corporate America, and good looks in the end win out over proven experience.  Welcome to 21st century Corporate America, folks!

Let's talk about something else that is equally disturbing - a potential employee's use of social media.  I am of the opinion that the First Amendment allows people to have freedom of speech and expression, and that no one should be disqualified from work they are perfect for just because they have a Facebook or Twitter account, because what these people do on their own time is their business.  It is one thing, for instance, to make sure a potential candidate for a job is not a serial killer, a terrorist, or a sexual deviant; as an employer, I would take those precautions too.  Also, it is fine to make sure a potential candidate for a position is not addicted to crystal meth or crack - altered chemical-induced mental states do affect job performance.  But, when a person wants to talk politics with their friends, share religious convictions, or speak out on something, that is their right and their business.  You are hired for a job - at least you are supposed to be! - based on your skills at doing the required tasks of the job, not on whether or not you like the current President of the US or not.  Some companies too are so insecure about their own reputations - call that self-inflation - that they get paranoid that (God forbid!) an employee may mention their name on their Facebook page.   I have learned something about that - if a company is that sensitive about people saying anything, it means simply that there may not be something right with how said company is run, and my question to the corporate management would be what they are trying to hide.   Also, let me put the brass at some of these companies to rest - after your employees have had a busy day at your office, the last thing most of them want to talk about is work, and I really don't think you are going to be coming up in the conversation with their Facebook buddies, really.  Bottom line is that these corporate management types need to get over themselves, simple as that.  Also, while I am on that subject, why is it when a company goes prying into a potential employee's personal business, do they never see the good?  I, for instance, am a capable artist, writer, and culinary genius (my humility shows, doesn't it?), yet I don't see anyone taking an interest in that.  It just seems like the company is just trying to dig up dirt instead of learning about your talents and abilities (unless the potential employee is a hot young female with a well-endowed cup size on their bras - curious there, and forgive the sexism of that remark please).  Bottom line, there is an imbalance in the way companies screen potential employees, and that has to stop; good people are denied work, their families suffer, and they often are not told why. 

Now, let's talk about the experience factor.  I have taken paralegal training, and even have earned a certificate in Paralegal Studies.  I got that back in 2006 in order to help my job prospects, but as of yet I have not even had a paralegal opportunity.  It seems like most law firms will not hire paralegals unless they have 3 to 5 years of experience, which makes no sense.  First, the number sounds like a prison sentence - "3 to 5 before you work for us!" - and second, if the leg-up is not given, then how does a person gain the experience??  Especially for the legal profession, the following is for you:

Now, getting back to the male issue.   I am a soon-to-be 44-year-old male with 15 years of office experience, stellar references, and a high level of education, yet I have had problems getting work.  Some others I have met have similar problems.  No, I don't claim to be a fashion model, I don't have female body parts, but I am good at my work.  So, why do companies ignore people like me - not even a polite rejection letter in most cases - who can do the job, have the perfect qualifications, yet we're rejected?   You know, I can understand (and wholeheartedly agree) that women and minorities deserve equal opportunities, but in recent years "affirmative action" regulations and "political correctness" have gotten so out-of-hand that often good candidates for jobs are passed over because the candidate has "two berries instead of a cherry," or lighter skin color.  What do these externals have to do with skill and ability to perform the tasks of a position, really?   If a woman or someone of color does have better qualifications for the job, then I in no means have an issue with that at all - a company should hire people who are up to the task, and externals have nothing to do with that.  However, on one too many occasions, I have been passed over for jobs because some young girl, or some fat Black woman who talks too much on a cellphone and can do little else, gets a job based on the externals - often, those same people end up being fired or they quit, but that is OK too, because they can just yell "workplace discrimination" even when none is involved.  It's frankly just ridiculous.  America's economic state would be so much better if we started hiring qualified people based on their experience and skills (regardless of color, as there are talented individuals of all shapes, colors and sizes) rather than trying to meet some stupid "quota" just to keep the government from poking its nose in and saying "Ah, you don't have enough Blacks, or Spanish-speaking people, etc."  Who cares, honestly??  At the end of the day, it is the person who gets the job done that matters - that person may speak with a Spanish accent, or could be White, Black, male, female, old, young, skinny, fat, etc; it doesn't really matter - and in the end it benefits both the employee and the company as well.  In other words, if you are going to be "equal opportunity," then be equal in recognizing the skills and talents of employees who can do the job; God forbid, in some cases that may even be a 44-year-old slightly overweight White guy, or a 66-year-old White woman! 

I know this is going to be controversial, and I may be misrepresented in what I have said, so let me close out by saying this.  All people - Black, White, Hispanic, male, female, old, young, fat, skinny, etc. - have potential, and all of us have suitable skills for the job or task that is perfect for us.  It is time we recognize that, and stop letting societal quirks deny some while priveleging others.  And, although I don't think women should be denied any opportunity they work hard for, I also feel that same courtesy needs to be extended to men who are equally qualified.  If the reader gets nothing else out of this, let it be that.  Thanks again until next time.