Wed, Aug 31, 2011
Updated: Monster Speaks Out Against Employment Discrimination
Posted by Patrick Manzo
UPDATE on August 31, 2011: We continue to closely review our site and are not aware of any job postings that exclude the unemployed. As before, we welcome our job seekers to notify us of any inappropriate job postings, and we remain committed to our proven process of working with our employer customers to address any job posting issues.
UPDATE on August 19, 2011: In light of the continued public discussion and comments on this blog post, we’d like to update a few points we think are being misrepresented. For years, Monster has had the highest standard in our industry regarding what we allow employers to post on our site. As we’ve stated below and in our earlier statement in February, we oppose discrimination in the hiring process. Per our standard practice, we reviewed our site and determined that less than one one-hundredth of one percent of the postings on Monster had any language excluding the unemployed. As of this writing, we are not aware of any postings on our site that exclude the unemployed. We will continue to monitor our site closely and address this and similar issues with our customers. We welcome our job seekers to alert us of any inappropriate posting using the red flag that appears above and below every job posting. We have been, and will continue to be, an advocate for our jobseekers.
———————————
Published August 8, 2011:
It’s hard enough to be unemployed without the added obstacle of discrimination based on, ironically, being unemployed. Companies that exclude the unemployed from hiring consideration are missing important realities about talent and how to find the best matches for their organizations.
Monster addressed this issue some months ago, but we think it is worth raising again in light of the recent increase in media and advocacy group attention on the issue.
As an advocate for job seekers, Monster opposes discrimination in any form. Monster has strict guidelines prohibiting discrimination on the basis of, for example, race, religion or gender in a job posting. If we identify a posting that violates these guidelines, we work with that company to immediately address the issue. These policies are in place because the activity is illegal.
While we oppose discrimination against the unemployed on numerous grounds, we believe it is the responsibility of employers themselves, rather than Monster, to decide what they say in their job postings and how they want their company to be viewed. We believe that any companies intentionally excluding this segment of the population from consideration are missing out on great talent and putting their reputations at risk.
Employers owe it to all their stakeholders to identify and cultivate the best talent and remove obstacles for qualified candidates to join the workforce once again. Many of those laid off in the recession are victims of structural changes in their company as a result of strategy shifts or economic conditions; they are not out of work because of lack of skill or poor performance.
Who among us doesn’t know a great person in this situation? Systematically excluding this group of candidates is simplistic, arbitrary and potentially leaves a valuable portion of the talent pool out of the running.
Fortunately, we see only rare occurrences of this kind of exclusionary language contained in the job postings on our site. Media reports highlighting Monster in association with this issue overstate the frequency of this occurrence, at least on our sites. While we cannot speak for other job search and recruitment sites, we at Monster know that ads with this type of language are limited to a tiny fraction of our overall postings.
Further, when we identify those postings, we reach out to the relevant employer and advise them of our view that this is poor recruiting practice. The advocacy groups targeting Monster are doing a disservice to job seekers by deterring them from the world’s largest marketplace of job opportunity because of a small group of companies who are the exception to the rule.
How Monster is Meeting Its Mission
Since our inception, we’ve always been an advocate for job seekers. Our mission is to inspire people to improve their lives through the world of work. That’s why we created the “Keep America Working” tour of 100+ career fairs across the country. We spent over $5 million to create opportunities for employers and unemployed people to connect face to face, at no charge to either.
Unlike others in our industry, our services are uniformly free for job seekers.
Today, we continue our commitment to help seekers through a range of public/private state and local government initiatives among many other services. We’ve created and host Power Seeker Workshops to help people hone their job-seeking skills; we participate in career fairs across the country; and we are forming strong working relationships at the state level.
In Ohio, for example, we created the employment clearinghouse website, OhioMeansJobs.com, which allows Ohio employers to post job listings for free. OhioMeansJobs.com has already connected numerous Ohio job seekers and employers and provides a vital tool in strengthening the state’s workforce. We want everyone who wants a job to have a great shot at getting one.
At the end of the day, everyone wins when great people get connected with great opportunities. We will continue to advocate for every individual having a fair opportunity at employment.
Discrimination based on employment status is bad for job seekers, for companies looking for great talent and for the overall global economy.
Related Posts
22 Responses to “Updated: Monster Speaks Out Against Employment Discrimination”
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
- - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 12. Aug, 2011
[...] issued a defense in a blog post last week stating that it opposes discrimination in any form, but ultimately leaves the [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0 - - 22. Aug, 2011
[...] defended itself in a blog post, stating that “as of this writing, we are not aware of any postings on our site that exclude [...]
Like or Dislike:
0 0
August 8, 2011 at 2:28 PM
Great to Hear the Monster Speak Out on such an overlooked issue!
Have you heard? “NO UNEMPLOYED CANDIDATES WILL BE CONSIDERED AT ALL.” The Huffington Post reported this capitalized quote from an actual job ad. This is not an isolated case. Time Magazine, CNNMoney, other newspapers and blogs across the country have all published stories on how some companies and recruiters are writing variations of “Unemployed Need Not Apply” in their job ads.
http://www.smartrecruiters.com/static/blog/discrimination-of-the-unemployed/
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
August 13, 2011 at 12:36 PM
This is a simple one – you are acting as their agent and therefore as culpable as the employer in permitting this type of discrimination. If indeed you actually oppose discrimination, then taking money (or doing it for free) to allow it to proliferate on your own website makes no sense. Its an illogical argument.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
0
August 16, 2011 at 8:27 AM
As part of your terms and conditions, it states (http://my.monster.com/terms/):
You may not use Your Monster job posting to: (c) post jobs that include any screening requirement or criterion in connection with a job posting where such requirement or criterion is not an actual and legal requirement of the posted job;
Monster reserves the right to remove any job posting or content from any Monster Site, which in the reasonable exercise of Monster’s discretion, does not comply with the above Terms, or if any content is posted that Monster believes is not in the best interest of Monster.
If at any time during Your use of the Monster Services, You made a misrepresentation of fact to Monster or otherwise misled Monster in regards to the nature of Your business activities, Monster will have grounds to terminate Your use of the Monster Services.
I would certainly think that a requirement that an applicant be currently employed would fall under this term/condition. Pursuant to your own rules, you should go beyond “… reach(ing) out to the relevant employer and advise them of our view that this is poor recruiting practice”, and remove such postings from your site. If an employer continues to post such add, they should be excluded from posting jobs on Monster.com.
Do the right thing.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
August 18, 2011 at 7:06 PM
I call BS on Monster. Monster reserves the right to remove any job posting or content from any Monster Site, which in the reasonable exercise of Monster’s discretion, does not comply with the above Terms, or if any content is posted that Monster believes is not in the best interest of Monster.
“OR IF ANY CONTENT IS POSTED THAT MONSTER BELIEVES IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF MONSTER.”
It appears to this poster, that since Monster continues to post such listings, that Monster believes that it IS IN THE BEST INTEREST of Monster to continue to “support” these companies by allowing them to advertise. Therefore, I believe that social media NOT ONLY HAS EVERY RIGHT, but has the “RESPONSIBILITY” to inform the public of this despicable, and downright disgusting, policy. In a time where we are seeing record unemployment, 13.9 million unemployed and 44.4% of those unemployed for over 27 weeks. Being as I have a husband that has been unemployed for five of the last seven years, and has been unemployed for the last 22 months, (has finally found contract work, no benefits) and we are NOT the exception…I find this policy and your support of it to be unconscionable. How policies of this ilk can be condoned by a company that is supposed to be about employment, is perplexing. One must believe that the largest share of those seeking employment through Monster, are THE unemployed. How betrayed we feel. Damn skippy we signed the USAction petition. You can quote all the great things you do to support the unemployed, and it’s all empty if you choose to partner with companies that want nothing to do with the unemployed. Can you say hypocrisy? I can only hope that Congress acts, or that a lawsuit is forthcoming. Shame on you.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
August 24, 2011 at 12:58 PM
How is allowing ads to be run on your site that discriminate against the unemployed any better than doing the discrimination yourself? It is up to the employer to not discriminate, but you control the content on your site. Would you also allow people to post ads saying that people of a certain race, gender or sexual orientation need not apply? Because I(and many others) don’t see how this is any better.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
August 29, 2011 at 2:27 AM
Morally, we should all appeal to the employers and advise them that this is “poor recruiting practice”, and remove such postings from websites. If an employer continues to post such ads, they should be excluded from posting jobs on Monster.com altogether. Discrimination of any sort, against anyone who is able and qualified to do the job is against the law. Question: what about people who just graduated from college who is not presently employed? or, victims of company “reductions in force” driven by economical impacts on our society? This whole problem sounds like a republican/conservative way of thinking since these are folks who cares about no one unless they are all like themselves but must be reminded periodically that many of their own are poor and unemployed as well.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
August 29, 2011 at 11:15 AM
Monster.com is not the culprit here. As a staffing consultant with many years experience in the field, many companies make it known that they do NOT want us to refer unemployed or active candidates (another term for unemployed). Companies pay recruiters for recruiting or shall we say “sniping” other companies’ employees (passive candidates) and referring them as candidates. Make no mistake about it…the real cuprits in keeping the unemployed in a state of improverishment are President Obama and Congress. Our entire employment systems is BROKEN and the fix that is need lies in the hands of Congress primarily and President Obama secondarily. When 50-55% of our available labor force is forced to subsist outside the the legal boundaries of the employment system, it should be a clue that something is wrong because the system is not morking for the majority of the people. Legislative change is what is needed and President Obama and members of Congress are well aware of this fact. In 1994, the Dunlop Commission formed under President Bill Clinton issued a report with specific recommendations for Congress to make the legislative change to which I refer. You don’t have to take my word for this. Check it out for yourself…see the Dunlop Commission’s findings at http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/key_workplace/2. The recommendations to Congress are on pages 62-71. If Congress and the President followed through on the recommendations that were made over 17 years ago, millions of workers could be hired by companies who are willing to hire them. This can only happne if Congress provides the legal infrastructure that unties companies’ hands and removes the incentive for companies to engage in the type of deceptive hiring practices that we are witnessing here.
To read more, see article at: http://geni360.com/blog/economy-2/jobs/u-s-congress-holds-the-key-to-jobs-creation-and-uncontrolled-unemployment/.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1