March 28, 2024

You’re the Boss Blog: Has LinkedIn Changed the Way You Hire?

Steve Uster: “I’m a huge fan of LinkedIn for small-business owners, and I’ve never paid them a dime!”Chris Young for The New York Times Steve Uster: “I’m a huge fan of LinkedIn for small-business owners, and I’ve never paid them a dime!”

Today’s Question

What small-business owners think.

A small-business guide we’ve just published discusses several examples of how companies are using online tools to revamp their hiring processes. One example is Eldridge Capital, an asset-backed lender based in Toronto that recently introduced an offshoot, Zillidy, to issue small loans to small businesses.

Because those loans are backed by personal assets like luxury watches, jewelry and fine art, Steven Uster, chief executive of Eldridge Capital, needed to hire a chief appraiser. He placed ads in local media outlets and inquired at area gemology programs, but after several weeks had failed to find any viable candidates. Then he went on LinkedIn and typed “gemologist or jewelry appraiser Toronto” into the search bar. Within an hour of reading the profiles that appeared in the search results, he had four candidates, one of whom he hired a week later. “I don’t know why it didn’t occur to me sooner,” he said. “It should have been obvious.”

The guide suggests other tools and other less obvious tips, and it points out that LinkedIn has multiple levels of membership. In Mr. Uster’s case, he used his free basic account to find the appraiser. Once he spotted the abbreviated listings for a handful of promising candidates, including their current and most recent previous employers, he simply searched for them online to find out more. “I’m a huge fan of LinkedIn for small-business owners,” he said, “and I’ve never paid them a dime!”

Please read the guide and tell us what has worked for you.

Article source: http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/15/has-linkedin-changed-the-way-you-hire/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Business Briefing | Regulatory News: India Lends Supports to Case Seeking to Block Sites

The Indian government on Friday threw its weight behind a case against Internet giants that are embroiled in a battle over offensive content after a judge warned that Web sites could be blocked. The case, which has stoked worries about freedom of speech in the world’s largest democracy, was brought by a private petitioner seeking to remove images considered offensive to Hindus, Muslims and Christians from Web sites. The government on Friday officially sanctioned prosecuting 21 companies including Google and Facebook. The next hearing, when senior executives could be summoned, was set for March, local media said.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=6c3d6fd8ca0e437e7f86352b921d3cc9

Maids Test Residency Rules in Hong Kong

Tens of thousands of domestic workers fan across places like Victoria Park on Hong Kong Island, huddling together eating, singing, dancing, reading or playing cards. Sunday offers an escape from long days of housekeeping and child care, which often start at dawn and stretch well into the evening.

Some are young and newly arrived, but many have lived here for years, some even decades. Those long-term domestic workers are the focus of a court case that has prompted news conferences, marches and daily coverage in the local media, and has fueled an emotional debate about what it means to be a Hong Kong resident.

Starting Monday, a court will hear arguments from lawyers representing Evangeline Banao Vallejos, a woman from the Philippines who has lived in Hong Kong since 1986 and has worked for the same household for more than 24 years. It is time, her lawyers argue, that she be granted permanent residency.

Many foreigners can apply for that status once they have lived in Hong Kong for seven years. But domestic workers — who number 292,000 in a territory of seven million, according to a government estimate, and who come primarily from Indonesia and the Philippines, making up the bulk of Hong Kong’s non-Chinese population — are specifically excluded.

Observers say a ruling for Ms. Vallejos would be a landmark not just for Hong Kong, but for the region. “In many Asian countries, domestic workers are not even given a day off in a week,” said Nilim Baruah, a chief technical adviser with the International Labor Organization in Bangkok.

The case has fueled spirited debate in Hong Kong. Some decry what they see as discrimination against foreign-born maids; other say that giving them permanent status could have serious economic consequences. The case has also raised questions about the sensitive issue of Hong Kong’s legal independence from Beijing and the “one country, two systems” model that has been in place since Great Britain returned the territory to China in 1997.

“Everyone knows that this is a legal issue, but it is spilling into the political arena,” said Kylie Uebergang, an executive of Civic Exchange, a nonpartisan public policy research group based in Hong Kong.

Neither the Hong Kong nor the Philippine government, citing the sensitive nature of the case, would comment on the legal issues. But in a nod to how polarizing the issue has become, the Hong Kong justice secretary, Wong Yan-lung, asked the public last week to respect whatever ruling the court issues.

Ms. Vallejos’s supporters say that denying permanent residency to domestic helpers violates Hong Kong’s Basic Law, the mini-constitution that took effect with the 1997 handover, and which spells out the seven-year requirement. Permanent residents have the right to vote and greater access to public services like health care, and may bring spouses, dependent children and, in some cases, parents into Hong Kong.

Opponents of Ms. Vallejos’s cause — notably, political parties and trade organizations affiliated with the government — point out that other groups, like diplomats and contract workers brought in for specific assignments, are also ineligible for permanent residency.

A pro-Beijing political party, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, has estimated that as many as 125,000 foreign domestic helpers could be eligible to apply for permanent residency now, if the law were changed.

Based on that estimate, and assuming that all eligible domestics would gain permanent status and bring family members to Hong Kong, the party estimated that as many as 500,000 people could move into the territory, a scenario that could worsen unemployment and put new strains on social welfare services and an already tight housing market.

“We cannot afford a sudden influx of 300,000 new residents,” said Joseph Law, chairman of the Hong Kong Employers of Overseas Domestic Helpers Association, offering another estimate. “The public services cannot afford this. We don’t have enough housing for the people already here in Hong Kong.”

Fally Choi, program coordinator for the Asia Monitor Resource Center, a rights group supporting Ms. Vallejos’s appeal, calls such claims “nonscientific and irresponsible,” saying, “This is purely racial discrimination and class discrimination. Other foreign workers are allowed to apply for permanent residency.”

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/22/world/asia/22iht-maids22.html?partner=rss&emc=rss