Should you come out on your resume?

As social acceptance of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and other sexual minorities grows, the issue of how open a job seeker should be about his or her sexual orientation has become more of a topic for debate.

There are those who argue that LGBT job hunters should be as open and frank as they can be about their orientation on their resumes. They reason that openly gay people would not want to work for an employer who cannot accept them for who they are, so best to get the matter out of the way up front.

Then there are those who point out that sexual orientation, like race and religion, has no bearing on a candidates ability to do a job. Given that, why bother mentioning it at all?

In general, the latter advice is more sound than the former. Not only is it irrelevant to ones' capacity to do the job, but in many places, laws do not forbid discrimination in employment based on sexual orientation. (Philadelphia is not one of those places, but Pennsylvania is.)

There is an exception, however. Some LGBT job seekers may have experience working for identifiably gay employers or professional affiliations that reflect their sexual orientation, and listing these on one's resume would normally be encouraged if they are relevant to the type of work being sought. And so it is here, but how to list them depends on ones own comfort level - and concerns over those legal protections as well.

If the organization has the terms gay or lesbian in its name, one might consider listing them by their initials and letting the interviewer bring up the subject, for instance. Those concerned about screening for homophobic workplaces, on the other hand, might want to be completely upfront about the subject by listing the names in full. Because many large employers are ahead of the general public or the legislature when it comes to diversity in the workplace, doing so today will exclude job seekers from far fewer openings than was the case even a few short years ago.

What do you think? Do you think you should be upfront on your resume or do you think it shouldn't matter? Let me know in the comments.

By Sandy Smith

Sandy Smith is a veteran freelance writer, editor and public relations professional who lives in Philadelphia. Besides blogging for PhillyJobs.com, he has written for numerous publications and websites, would be happy to do your resume, and is himself actively seeking career opportunities on Beyond.com. Check out his LinkedIn profile and read his other posts on PhillyJobsBlog.com.

Discrimination against the unemployed: There oughta be a law

Back in April, I wrote here about a worrisome development on the employment front: employers refusing to consider unemployed candidates for job openings.

Back then, the subject was largely confined to the realm of rumor and hearsay, though even then, some examples of the practice had been reported in the press.

The issue has exploded since then. Now, ads with phrases like 'Qualified candidates must be currently employed' are not hard to find at all. In fact, I just lifted that phrase verbatim from a job opening from a popular online classified ad site. (Like last time, I could not find any such listings in a quick search of PhillyJobs.com, but this time, I suspect it may be because I did not search hard enough or in the right manner.)

Right now, job seekers who have been out of work for a while - and with the average length of unemployment now at nine months, there are a lot of them - have little recourse if they should find themselves shut out of job opportunities for this reason, for employment status is not a protected category under current discrimination law.

With the issue now capturing the attention of politicians and major media - The New York Times reported on the practice July 25 - that may change. Already, New Jersey has passed a law barring employers from running help-wanted ads that require candidates to be employed, and two other states are contemplating similar laws. A bill that would outlaw discrimination in hiring based on employment status has also been introduced in Congress and is currently in committee.

Unfortunately, the rise of this practice is a sign of the times: in the boom times of the 1990s, by contrast, even convicted felons could find jobs easily. Now, however, it's a buyer's market when it comes to employment, and with so many sellers offering their labor for sale, the buyers are doing whatever they can to keep the flow of resumes into their inboxes to a manageable level. This strategy, however, shuts out millions of job candidates who have valuable skills to offer and are eager to offer them.

What have you found as you peruse offerings on PhillyJobs and other career communities? What is your opinion of this practice? Do you agree or disagree that there oughta be a law? Share your thoughts in the comments.

By Sandy Smith

Sandy Smith is a veteran freelance writer, editor and public relations professional who lives in Philadelphia. Besides blogging for PhillyJobs.com, he has written for numerous publications and websites, would be happy to do your resume, and is himself actively seeking career opportunities on Beyond.com. Check out his LinkedIn profile and read his other posts on PhillyJobsBlog.com.

No jobless need apply?

The 'Net, the blogosphere, and even the news media have been abuzz over the past few months with talk of the latest insult being thrown at unemployed job-seekers: Employers are stating that they will not consider job applications from unemployed candidates.

Job seekers in various locations have reported that companies have been posting position openings featuring announcements like, "Applicants must be currently employed" or "No unemployed candidates will be considered." While most of the reports of this practice have been anecdotal, one Florida TV station documented an example of such a posting by a large telecommunications firm earlier this year.

A quick-and-dirty search of some Philadelphia job listings turned up none that bore such warnings, but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened here. The reports have been widespread and persistent enough that in February, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission held hearings on the issue.

There is something of a Catch-22 quality to this practice. By ruling out unemployed candidates, employers increase the number of long-term unemployed, who then may become even less employable (that is, if they're not doing things to stay engaged and keep their skills sharp). It also suggests that these employers are making a prejudiced and unfair assumption about the unemployed: namely, that there's something wrong with them and they somehow deserved their fate.

Employers who do screen out unemployed applicants do themselves a disservice on several fronts. For starters, they needlessly limit the pool of qualified candidates from which they can fill positions. For another, they ignore the likelihood that these candidates will save them money in several ways - by reducing training costs, for instance, or by saving on salary costs relative to similarly experienced workers still employed.

Fernan R. Caparo of the Society for Human Resource Management told the EEOC at the hearing that in her organization's view, "screening out the unemployed is not an effective practice." Of course it isn't. Any employer who wants to get the best possible candidates for a job should cast as wide a net as possible, and these days, one's current employment status is no proxy for one's suitability for employment.

The EEOC may not be able to do anything about this practice, as employment status is not a protected category. But wise employers can. All they need to do is just say no to screening based on current employment.

Have you encountered job openings where an employer refused to consider unemployed candidates? What do you think about this practice? Share your thoughts in the comments.

Then head on over to PhillyJobs.com, where there are plenty of employers who want to hear from you.

By Sandy Smith

Sandy Smith is a veteran freelance writer, editor and public relations professional who lives in Philadelphia. Besides blogging for PhillyJobs.com, he has written for numerous publications and websites, would be happy to do your resume, and is himself actively seeking career opportunities on Beyond.com. Check out his LinkedIn profile and read his other posts on PhillyJobsBlog.com.