The Perfect Fit

The Most Difficult Market For Finding Candidates In Years . . .

I've spoken with two prospective clients in the last week who were amazed when I told them that right now is the most difficult market in which to identify, recruit and hire premier employees in years . . . and it's going to continue getting worse.  Their response was uniform is their disbelief . . . they always point to the unemployment rate, which nationally is currently 9.6% . . . sounds pretty high . . . and it is. 

Most of that unemployment rate is made of manufacturing and construction related labor.  The housing crisis and decline of American manufacturing is swellling the unemployment rates.  The vast majority of our clients require candidates to have a minimum of a college degree.  When you plug that fact into the unemployment rate, it all of a sudden drops to around 4.5%!  The unemployment rate for college graduates is 4.5% . . . not 9.6%.

To complicate the reality, as most of you know "full employment" is not 0%(State of economy in which all eligible people who want to work can find employment at prevailing wage rates. However, it does not imply 100 percent employment because allowances must be made for frictional unemployment and seasonal factors  If you want to read more, you can do so here.).  While economists have different opinions of "full employment" it is generally accepted to be between 2% and 7%.  An unemployment rate of around 4.5% for college graduates, given the full context of the number, really suggests that there aren't all that many unemployed college graduates out there!  There are even fewer "premier performers"!

The education level of candidates is not the only complicating factor in the market for candidates being weak.  The significant drop in housing prices has made the relocation of superior candidates very difficult, because they are unwilling to personally suffer the loss in the current valuation and selling price of their home.  If clients are not willing to support the move by helping with temporary housing and/or subsidizing the loss of revenue in the candidate's home sale, candidates simply won't move . . . and who can blame them?  Would you walk away from 20%-30% of your home's value from when you bought it?  I doubt it.

Premier candidates are additionally becoming increasingly difficult to move because of the size of the counter offers they receive from their existing employer.  Remember we're talking about top performers here, in many different executive level functional roles.

When a current employer hears a top performer is going to go somewhere else, they'll hand them a check for $20,000.00 to stay, along with increasing their compensation.  They make it very difficult for a top performing candidate to leave.

It's unfortunate that history show that once an employer finds out an employee was ready to leave, the counteroffer notwithstanding, that candidate has become "blemished" in the employers eyes.  They can be perceived by the employer to be "disloyal" or "not to be trusted".  Often times the career path of the candidate who accepts the counter offer will never be the same as it was before.

Candidates who receive a counteroffer almost always think to themselves, why did it take my deciding to leave to get this raise?  What were they waiting for?  Why didn't they give it to me sooner, and I might not have considered moving in the first place . . .

The point it, there are multiple factors that have converged to make it very difficult to find top employees.  The demographics of the country, with baby boomers retiring and fewer highly trained professionals entering the workforce will continue to increase the difficulty in identifying, recruiting and hiring top performing candidates.

Prohibited Employment Policies/Practices

According to the EEOC (The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission): "Under the laws enforced by EEOC, it is illegal to discriminate against someone (applicant or employee) because of that person's race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to retaliate against a person because he or she complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit."  We all know that perspective, and think we understand it.  To read a summary of those employment practices that are specifically prohibited by the various appropriate Federal laws, go here.

As I mentioned in my previous post, one of the practical results of equal employment practices is the applicable Federal law relating to using photographs on your resume, or by inference, using photographs at any time through the employment application process (e.g. photos on resumes).

I've received a number of resumes over the years with photographs on them.  It's sort of ironic that the photographs are usually of attractive young women.  It's obvious that a photograph at the very least identifies the applicant's gender and race/color and/or ethnicity.  Each of those characteristics is protected under Federal law.  The employer (every time I use the word "employer" in this article, it also refers to recruiters) is not allowed to use any of those characteristics as a part of the application process.  The only certain way to insure that an employer won't  (can't) use them, is to not give employers that information.

The EEOC specifically states: " . . . employers should not ask for a photograph of an applicant. If needed for identification purposes, a photograph may be obtained after an offer of employment is made and accepted."  Employers should not ask for a photograph . . . that's clear.  It's also clear from EEOC rulings and case law, that a photograph should simply not be apart of the application process.

In this world of websites, social media, LinkedIn and Facebook, much of the content might have been created in support of the employment (job search) process, what's one to do?

Here are my suggestions to utilize social and new media, without compromising employers and getting the attention of the EEOC.

You should not:

• Include a photograph on your resume or any support materials created by you and used as a component of the application process.

• Include a photograph on a blog or website (created by you or soemone you hire) that you use as a part of the application process.

What about LinkedIn and the profile photograph?  Many professinoals use LinkedIn in support of the employment application process.  So far, there is no case law that suggests that the profile photograph on LinkedIn cannot be utilized.  That's not to say what rulings will happen in the future.  Relative to the speed of the EEOC and Federal Courts, LinkedIn is a relatively "new" phenomenon and may very well be dealt with in a larger context than it "contains a photograph".  (I consider Facebook to be personal, and LinkedIn professional . . . so I'm not dealing with Facebook now).

You can include your LinkedIn Profile link on your resume.  I cannot send your LinkedIn profile to my client as part of my introduction process.  I cannot send a website with your picture as part of my introduction process.  It is permissable (so far) to include your LinkedIn Profile link on your resume (even with the profile picture).

This is important, because once employers see your picture as a result of how you apply, or introduce yourself, they have to disregard you as a candidate.  They may or may not inform you of that decision.  Don't put them in the position of having to make that decision.  Become a candidate based on your experience, passion and goals . . . not your looks!

The Newest St. Louis Certified Recruiter With CPC Title

 Over the past few weeks, I've voluntarily subjected myself to the anxious anticipation of having to take a test . . . I'm pleased and proud to tell you that I have passed a two and a half hour examination to become a "Certified Personnel Consultant", or CPC.  This certification is administered by the National Association for Personnel Services, or NAPS. 

My goal was to take one more step in separating myself from other recruiters who have not spent the time and money necessary to achieve this certification.  Over the past weeks, I've really felt like I was back in school learning the details and intricacies of Federal laws like The Civil Rights Act of 1964, The Age Discrimination Act of 1967, The Equal Pay Act of 1963 and others, not to mention various Executive Orders and employment case law, all affecting the relationship between an employer or recruiter and a candidate.  I never realized that recruiters are literally treated just like employers in the eyes of the law.

There are generally four categories of readers of this blog, clients, candidates, colleagues and friends.  There is no longer any doubt in my mind that getting certified was worth the time and effort and will be beneficial as time goes on.  There is no question that I can better consult, and recruit for the benefit of both my clients and candidates.  I can now confidently say that you, as either a candidate or client should deal with certified recruiters.  If you don't deal with Bishop Partners, you can consult the National Registry of Certified Staffing Industry Professionals to find other certified recruiters.

For almost 10 years, I've conducted myself and my business with what I considered to be the highest ethical standards.  In becoming certified as CPC, my peers and NAPS have put additional responsibility and now, accountability on my conduct.  I'm proud to be continue to strive to live up to the ethical standards of the certification.

Some of NAPS Standards Of Interest to Consumers include:

Relations between Recruiters & Employers/Clients:

   1. A candidate's employment record, education, qualification and salary requirements shall be stated to the employer/client as accurately and fully as possible. Clients shall be advised by the recruiter if the recruiter disclaims liability for the accuracy of any information it transmits to the client.

   2. A candidate shall be referred to the employer/client for interview only with prior authorization of the employer/client, which may be given verbally.

   3. Confidential information relating to the business policy of employer/clients, which is imparted as an aid to the effective handling of their job requirements, shall be treated accordingly.

   4. In the absence of an agreement to the contrary, a recruiter shall not attempt to recruit candidates for placement who are still employed by the company with whom they have been placed by the recruiter's firm, unless the candidates directly request the recruiter's assistance in seeking new employment.

   5. Direct mail, bulletins and resumes of candidates presented to employer/clients shall represent bona fide candidates.

   6. In the absence of an agreement to the contrary, a recruiter shall not attempt to recruit for placement candidates employed by a client company within one year of the most recent placement with that client company at the same location, unless the candidates directly request the recruiter's assistance in seeking new employment.

Relations between Recruiters and Candidates:

   1. Candidates shall be referred to employer/clients for interviews only on job openings for which at least verbal authority has been given by the employer/client.

   2. Representations made to candidates about the duties, probable length of employment, hours, benefits and salary of prospective positions shall be in conformance with the best knowledge of the recruiter.

   3. Precaution shall be taken against referring any candidate to employer/clients who are known to engage in illegal or questionable business practices which might jeopardize the safety of the candidate.

   4. Information about a candidate will be used only for the purpose of finding employment for that candidate. Confidential information shall be treated accordingly.

   5. A candidate shall be aware of charges, if any, before being permitted to incur any obligation for services rendered. Any monetary obligations, including interest charges, shall be fully disclosed in a written agreement, a copy of which shall be provided to the candidate, and it shall set forth any circumstances in which a candidate must pay for services.

   6. No candidate shall be referred to any employer where a strike or lockout exists or is impending (according to the best knowledge of the recruiter) without being notified or such condition.

Over the next few weeks, I intend to share some of the knowledge I gained as a result of studying the Manual and spending a full day in class.  There's some specifics and nuance to the Federal law, that frankly isn't common knowledge.  The fact that you don't know the law does not excuse you from having to obey the letter of it.  Federal employment law can have serious, and severe penalties.

Just to give you an idea of something you might not expect;  Did you know that it's illegal for a recruiter to send a resume to our client, if that resume has a picture?