For Those Employers Who Think No One Wants to Work Anymore

Employers complain that they can’t find workers. They don’t stop to consider why those workers are passing them by.

Photo by Christina @ wocintechchat.com on Unsplash

I happen to read the website Fairygodboss, a career site geared toward women, now and then. Recently, a hiring manager posted that they experienced a dearth of quality candidates for an administrative position. She stated that one candidate showed up to the interview dressed as though they were running errands. When she asked a different candidate about her Excel skills, the person replied, “My boyfriend is good at Excel. I can just pick his brain.” The hiring manager then added that when interviewing a third candidate on Zoom, the person suddenly panned the camera to reveal a messy bedroom that contained soiled bedsheets.

Employers like the one in the first paragraph view those three job applicants as unmotivated, never stopping to think why they may not be attracting what they consider good talent.

For the past year, employers have bemoaned the fact that employees have been quitting in droves, to the point where a new phrase, “the Great Resignation” was coined. The ongoing pandemic forced us to isolate for months at a time to avoid contracting a potentially serious and lethal virus. As result, many people re-evaluated what they wanted out of their lives and they concluded that the way we used to work before where we were overworked, underpaid, and unappreciated was no longer acceptable to them.

The belief that “nobody wants to work anymore” is a cop-out. I will die on that hill. Many people view Corporate America as a capricious, callous entity that smiles in your face one day and throws you under the bus the next.

How Employers Shoot Themselves In The Foot

We’re conditioned to believe that employers are fair and just but that isn’t always the case. They can be as biased as any individual. Here are some reasons why employers are clueless as to why they can’t find “good” employees:

They routinely pass on people if they aren’t white. I don’t have a common first name. My resume as well those of other people with ethnic names is more likely to get tossed in the trash. I, as well as other BIPOC with ethnic names, are less likely to get contacted for an interview compared to someone with a more “white” sounding name even if we have the same qualifications they do. Some may suggest that I use a common white American name like Victoria to get my foot in the door, but I refuse. Why should I disguise a part of my identity to make white employers feel more comfortable around me?
They routinely pass on people who are older than 40. Traditional paradigms purport that older workers are too expensive or are incapable of learning new technology. Those employers risk putting their companies at a competitive disadvantage by overlooking the skills and experience that older workers offer. They have strong attention to detail and resilience from decades of work experience that younger workers don’t have. Also, in some cases, they have a longer tenure at the job than their younger counterparts.
They dismiss the neurodivergent or those with disabilities, believing they are a burden. The most common argument against hiring someone with special needs is that accommodations are expensive. To be productive, many employees with special needs require nothing more than the same consideration an employer may already be providing to its non-disabled and neurotypical employees, such as flexible work schedules, telecommuting, or restructured workstations. One study found that the cost of accommodations that employers incurred tended to be around $500, which for many businesses is nominal. Additionally, the belief that disabled and neurodivergent workers are incapable of performing their job duties is ableist. They may need to perform their jobs differently due to their disability or neurodiversity, which can lead to new methods of productivity that non-disabled or neurotypical workers wouldn’t think of.
They give mothers the shaft. One study indicates that a third of all managers prefer hiring men over women of child-bearing age or women who already have children because they believe that men are more committed to their work. Those employers also feel that if their pregnant employees take maternity leave, they don’t perform as well in their jobs once they return, believing that their infants are a distraction. Despite gains, traditional gender roles persist in some segments of our society where men are expected to be providers and women are expected to tend to their homes and children. Employers don’t recognize that the skills that mothers use to keep their families afloat are transferable to the workplace. Juggling multiple tasks such as cooking, doing laundry, scheduling medical appointments, and tending to children are major assets in the workplace where workers often perform multiple tasks simultaneously, yet homemaking is devalued in our society.
The pay is crappy or the culture is toxic. The last time I job hunted was six years ago. I came across a fair number of online job listings for claims processing jobs or other administrative positions that required a bachelor’s or master’s degree and a minimum of five years’ experience but the salary listed was only $15 an hour. That’s the minimum wage in the state I live in. Know what that translates to as a yearly salary? It’s approximately $28,000 a year, which is not a living wage in the region of the United States I live in. For the amount of education and work experience that some employers demand, to be paid poverty wages is an insult. And don’t get me started on toxic work environments. The managers that micromanage. The managers that think berating or abusing you will make you more productive. The employers that want employees to do unethical or downright illegal things. No paycheck is worth that kind of stress.

Employers Need To Adapt

Employers dare to complain that people don’t want to work when they refuse to pay a living wage, have toxic work environments or won’t hire qualified marginalized people, who make up a substantial portion of the workforce. Since they don’t fit the preferred aesthetic of the young, white, male, able-bodied, neurotypical employee, companies would rather cling to a paradigm that doesn’t work anymore than adapt in order to compete.

For the first time in decades, employees have the upper hand. Those who have suffered through waves of economic upheaval over the last few decades through lay-offs, restructurings, or losing their jobs to automation are finding new ways to work in the gig economy where they have more control over when and how much they work.

Employers are going to have to find a way to evolve and compete with a variety of factors and reevaluate if their standards are too high for the jobs they’re hiring for. For instance, why do entry-level positions require five years’ experience or an advanced degree?

Employers who aren’t satisfied with the kind of applicants they’re attracting and blame job seekers for their lack of ambition only have themselves to blame. Why they expect to attract top talent if they don’t pay a living wage, don’t have a good working environment, or don’t consider qualified candidates if they aren’t young, white, male, or able-bodied is beyond me. Because workers are still making it clear that the old days where they were expected to be grateful to be employed no matter how poorly they were treated or paid are over.