So I want a new law passed..

rico x hood

rico x hood

9,253
3,007
Joined
Sep 10, 2005
I just got off the phone with aides for my two Senators, Congressmen, and State Delegate, urging them to propose my bill in their respective chambers. The bill would require businesses to give disqualified applicants specific reasons why they were passed over for a particular job. I believe that it will give job seekers insight and tools to make themselves more attractive to potential employers and thus increasing their chances of becoming gainfully employed. No more formed letters or emails, or no response at all.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
That idea opens the door to a variety of lawsuits. Businesses do not want to be liable for why they didn't hire you.

It's a good idea for a country that doesn't have a culture of suing for anything as long as they can.
 
Rico x Hood said:
I just got off the phone with aides for my two Senators, Congressmen, and State Delegate, urging them to propose my bill in their respective chambers. The bill would require businesses to give disqualified applicants specific reasons why they were passed over for a particular job. I believe that it will give job seekers insight and tools to make themselves more attractive to potential employers and thus increasing their chances of becoming gainfully employed. No more formed letters or emails, or no response at all.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I love the idea, but I actually think there is a specific law in place that makes it illegal to give the reasons as to why a person's application was terminated.  I remember hearing something about that this past weekend.  I could be wrong, but it may not be as "easy" as gettin a law passed.

either way, keep fighting the good fight
 
Not going to happen. Government does not have the right to regulate a private employer's hiring process, unless it impedes a constitutional right.

There have been recent laws in some cities, however, that prevent an employer from asking about criminal history during the initial phases of hiring. Even then, they can ask for it later.

Good luck though. I just think that most private employers would be against this.
 
Perhaps then businesses will make sure they have a valid reason for not hiring a particular candidate. I have never been on.the hiring end of a company so I have no idea what would be considered valid on that end. But I really feel as if this law would more positives than negatives.
 
This isn't a feasible idea imo. What stops all the businesses from just saying "You weren't a good fit.. thanks, have a nice day"

Who determines how 'specific' the reasons have to be for them not hiring you? In some cases their reasons may be proprietary, and the employers would be putting themselves at risk by exposing the inner workings of their company to someone who isn't an employee.
 
Rico x Hood said:
Perhaps then businesses will make sure they have a valid reason for not hiring a particular candidate. I have never been on.the hiring end of a company so I have no idea what would be considered valid on that end. But I really feel as if this law would more positives than negatives.
Click to expand...

That will open a can of worms. First of all, employers don't want to have to provide a reason for hiring someone. Secondly, if they were to do that, then people would be up in arms as to why they weren't chosen...even though it's the employer's decision as to who they want to hire.

I think you want this law passed for prospective job seekers to get a better idea of why they weren't hire, so that they may work on their deficiencies, but IMO, this law is not only unrealistic, but potentially detrimental to the entire notion of at-will employment.

Like I said, however, if employment practices are unconstitutional [i.e. sexism, racism, etc.] without any type of legal exception, then applicants do have a right to sue.
 
Rico x Hood said:
Valid points made in this thread. Definitely could become a cluster**** of litigation. It's just difficult to find a job these days, job seekers should be as well equipped as possible.

Back to the drawing board I go. My Delegate's aide asked me to write up a Bill Proposal, I'm going to incorporate these potential landmines into an improved and more in seorg proposal.
Click to expand...

Keep trying fam.

Not against it, I'm for the individual. Definitely some flaws and potential backfire with this law though.
 
ATGD7154xBBxMZ said:
That idea opens the door to a variety of lawsuits. Businesses do not want to be liable for why they didn't hire you.

It's a good idea for a country that doesn't have a culture of suing for anything as long as they can.
Click to expand...

Basically all of this.
 
Don't see this happening

Put yourself in the hiring managers seat and ask yourself if you really want this.
 
It's called the 'right to work' or 'at-will' employment'. Meaning you can quit at any time, I can fire you at any time, for any reason. Can also hire you, or not hire you. A company doesnt have to give specific reasons, its their right if they want you to work for them or not. Your proposal won't be a law any time soon.
 
Last edited:
Freeze said:
It's called the 'right to work' or 'at-will' employment'. Meaning you can quit at any time, I can fire you at any time, for any reason. Can also hire you, or not hire you. A company doesnt have to give specific reasons, its their right if they want you to work for them or not. Your proposal won't be a law any time soon.
Click to expand...

...unless you are infringing on constitutional/statutory rights.

But yeah, basically.
 
:lol:

Hopefully one day you will be on the hiring end, and you will see how this isn't feasible. If you want to see your deficiencies, ask someone that has a position that does hiring. Ask them to put you through mock interviews, and take them seriously. Tell them to break you down as honest as possible.

It's already tough for recruiters at big companies having to sort out through hundreds of resume's, many lose their chance right there with piss-poor resumes. Imagine how much time that will consume.

Honestly sometimes I wish I could tell candidates candid responses as to why they didn't land a job... on the spot:

"Your resume is crap"
"If you don't take the time to fix your resume, how do I know you'll take the time to do your job right"
"You didn't dress the part"
"You're attire does not meet minimum qualifications" :lol:
"You're not well spoken"

*shrugs*

Every interview you are making a pitch about yourself and the services you can provide for that company. It shouldn't be the other way around.
 
ReggieKILLER said:
I love the idea, but I actually think there is a specific law in place that makes it illegal to give the reasons as to why a person's application was terminated.  I remember hearing something about that this past weekend.  I could be wrong, but it may not be as "easy" as gettin a law passed.

either way, keep fighting the good fight
Click to expand...
Also I'm not sure something like this should be a law but more like a company policy that they uphold.
 
Freeze said:
It's called the 'right to work' or 'at-will' employment'. Meaning you can quit at any time, I can fire you at any time, for any reason. Can also hire you, or not hire you. A company doesnt have to give specific reasons, its their right if they want you to work for them or not. Your proposal won't be a law any time soon.
Click to expand...

But you can't fire people at any time for any reason once they'Dr out of their probationary period. I feel like this bill would expand on that idea a little and bring it to the hiring process.
 
ooIRON MANoo said:
:lol:

Hopefully one day you will be on the hiring end, and you will see how this isn't feasible. If you want to see your deficiencies, ask someone that has a position that does hiring. Ask them to put you through mock interviews, and take them seriously. Tell them to break you down as honest as possible.

It's already tough for recruiters at big companies having to sort out through hundreds of resume's, many lose their chance right there with piss-poor resumes. Imagine how much time that will consume.

Honestly sometimes I wish I could tell candidates candid responses as to why they didn't land a job... on the spot:

"Your resume is crap"
"If you don't take the time to fix your resume, how do I know you'll take the time to do your job right"
"You didn't dress the part"
"You're attire does not meet minimum qualifications" :lol:
"You're not well spoken"

*shrugs*

Every interview you are making a pitch about yourself and the services you can provide for that company. It shouldn't be the other way around.
Click to expand...

But imagine if you did give people feedback like that? The criticism may sting but the candidate would learn and maybe go and tweak their resume, update their wardrobe, or practice their answers. Some people go to Interview after interview and get rejected and have no idea what the Hell their doing wrong. An while the mock interview scenario is a great exercise no two jobs or industries are the same. The most valuable feedback would come from the hiring manager or HR recruiter themselves.

You do have a point though about having to come up with specific responses for all those resumes. Perhaps a better idea would to be to require businesses to give specific reasons for rejection to applicants who have had an interview.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
What, you think private employers are here to serve people that don't benefit them? :nerd:
 
Not going to happen, but normally you can go around it by just sending a follow up email to ask why you got rejected, and usually they will give their answer.
 
Rico x Hood said:
But imagine if you did give people feedback like that? The criticism may sting but the candidate would learn and maybe go and tweak their resume, update their wardrobe, or practice their answers. Some people go to Interview after interview and get rejected and have no idea what the Hell their doing wrong. An while the mock interview scenario is a great exercise no two jobs or industries are the same. The most valuable feedback would come from the hiring manager or HR recruiter themselves.

You do have a point though about having to come up with specific responses for all those resumes. Perhaps a better idea would to be to require businesses to give specific reasons for rejection for applicants who have had an interview.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

In a perfect world, but we all know it will not play out that way. You may take constructive criticism well, but in my experience, people generally don't. Then you factor that we live in a country that thrives on litigation and you see why it would be a headache, especially for big companies/organizations.

Anyone in management? Have you written anyone up? The employee is never wrong... :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom