December 22, 2024

Employers Increasingly Rely on Internal Referrals in Hiring

But when a friend at Ernst Young recommended her, Ms. Parakh’s résumé was quickly separated from the thousands the firm receives every week because she was referred by a current employee, and within three weeks she was hired. “You know how long this usually takes,” she said. “It was miraculous.”

While whom you know has always counted in hiring, Ms. Parakh’s experience underscores a fundamental shift in the job market. Big companies like Ernst Young are increasingly using their own workers to find new hires, saving time and money but lengthening the odds for job seekers without connections, especially among the long-term unemployed.

The trend, experts say, has been amplified since the end of the recession by a tight job market and by employee networks on LinkedIn and Facebook, which can help employers find candidates more quickly and bypass reams of applications from job search sites like Monster.com.

Some, like Ernst Young, the accounting firm, have set ambitious internal goals to increase the proportion of hirings that come from internal referrals. As a result, employee recommendations now account for 45 percent of nonentry-level placements at the firm, up from 28 percent in 2010.

The company’s goal is 50 percent. Others, such as Deloitte and Enterprise Rent-A-Car, have begun offering prizes like iPads and large-screen TVs in addition to traditional cash incentives for employees who refer new hires.

Economists and other experts say the recession has severed networks for many workers, especially the long-term unemployed, whose ranks have remained high even as the economy recovers.

Nearly 4.8 million Americans have been out of work for 27 weeks or more, according to the Labor Department, three times as many as in late 2007. The typical unemployed worker has been jobless for 38 weeks, compared with 17 weeks before the recession.

While the overall unemployment rate has edged downward recently, little improvement is expected for the long-term jobless when data for December is released by the Labor Department on Friday.

“The long-term unemployed and other disadvantaged people don’t have access to the network,” said Mara Swan, executive vice president for global strategy and talent at Manpower Group, which provides temporary help and job placement services. “The more you’ve been out of the work force, the weaker your connections are.”

Although Ernst Young looks at every résumé submitted, “a referral puts them in the express lane,” said Larry Nash, director of experienced and executive recruiting there. Indeed, as referred candidates get fast-tracked, applicants from other sources like corporate Web sites, Internet job boards and job fairs sink to the bottom of the pile.

“You’re submitting your résumé to a black hole,” said John Sullivan, a human resources consultant for large companies who teaches management at San Francisco State University. “You’re not going to find top performers at a job fair. Whether it’s fair or not, you need to have employees make referrals for you if you want to find a job.”

Among corporate recruiters, Mr. Sullivan said, random applicants from Internet job sites are sometimes referred to as “Homers,” after the lackadaisical, doughnut-eating Homer Simpson. The most desirable candidates, nicknamed “purple squirrels” because they are so elusive, usually come recommended.

“We call it Monster.ugly,” said Mr. Sullivan, referring to Monster.com. “In the H.R. world, applicants from Monster or other job boards carry a stigma.”

Monster.com did not respond to a request for comment.

Even getting in the door for an interview is becoming more difficult for those without connections. Referred candidates are twice as likely to land an interview as other applicants, according to a new study of one large company by three economists from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. For those who make it to the interview stage, the referred candidates had a 40 percent better chance of being hired than other applicants.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/28/business/employers-increasingly-rely-on-internal-referrals-in-hiring.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Economix Blog: What’s Behind Labor Force Dropouts

On Tuesday I wrote about how the entirety of the net decline in the labor force last month could be explained by women dropping out. I also puzzled over why a majority of women who left the labor force happened to have been employed before they opted out, because the stereotypical labor force dropout is usually an unemployed worker who got discouraged and gave up looking for a new job.

Since then I’ve dug into the history of labor force dropouts and what workers usually do right before they leave the labor force. As it turns out, November’s breakdown was not terribly unusual; a majority of women who leave the labor force each month are usually coming directly from a job (perhaps because they’re retiring, going on maternity leave or are laid off and not seeking re-employment):

DESCRIPTIONSource: Bureau of Labor Statistics, job flows data Note: Numbers in chart refer to gross number of job-leavers, and so do not subtract out the number of workers joining the labor force. Data are seasonally adjusted.

Note, however, that the number of women who leave the labor force directly from a job has actually fallen in the last few years, while the number of women leaving the labor force after having been recently unemployed has risen. This supports the discouraged-worker explanation of recent trends.

The same is true for men. As with female dropouts, typically most of the men who leave the labor force each month have been leaving directly after holding a job:

DESCRIPTIONSource: Bureau of Labor Statistics, job flows data Numbers in chart refer to gross number of job-leavers, and so do not subtract out the number of workers joining the labor force. Data are seasonally adjusted.

But while the number of men dropping out directly after holding a job (e.g., retirees) has stayed relatively flat in recent years, the number of men dropping out of the labor force after a spell of unemployment has risen.

Part of last month’s bizarre dropout pattern has been solved, then: In any given month of the last decade most of the people dropping out of the labor force have been leaving jobs, but the reason the total number of dropouts has risen more recently is that more unemployed workers have given up applying for jobs. Again, it’s the discouraged-worker narrative.

That still leaves some gender dynamics to be explained, though.

During the recession, which technically lasted from December 2007 to June 2009, some men dropped out of the labor force, and many times more women joined it. Many of these new female workers were probably stepping up as breadwinners when their husbands were laid off.

During the recovery, which extends from June 2009 to the present, both men and women have dropped out of the labor force, but many more women have dropped out than men.

Probably female dropouts have exceeded male dropouts lately because state and local government layoffs have disproportionately hit women. And as those women are laid off, they may become too discouraged by the sorry job market to even apply for new positions.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=605957ca717beaee5ad7c8bb720a58cd

Economix: Searching for a Silver Lining

CATHERINE RAMPELL

CATHERINE RAMPELL

Dollars to doughnuts.

Not to be a Debbie Downer, but is there any good news in today’s jobs report?

First, the bad news:

  • The number of net nonfarm payroll jobs added in June was 18,000, which is not statistically significant from zero (since that’s compared to a base of about 131 million jobs). Job growth for the previous two months was revised downward, too.
  • The average duration of unemployment continues to break records, and in June was at an all-time high of 39.9 weeks. In other words the average unemployed worker has been looking for a job for nine months.
  • The unemployment rate ticked up to 9.2 percent, and not because more people joined the labor force. In fact, the overall size of the labor force was a little bit smaller.
  • As a result, the labor force participation rate — that is, the share of adults who are working or actively looking for work — is just 64.1 percent. The last time the rated dipped below that was in 1983, when women were less likely to be in the labor force.
  • A broader measure of unemployment, including those who are working part time because they can’t find full-time jobs as well as people who have given up looking for work, rose to 16.2 percent from 15.8 percent.
  • The average length of the work week for all private payroll employees fell by 0.1 hour to 34.3 hours in June, a very bad indicator for future job growth. Usually employers start increasing the hours of their existing employees before they bring on new hires.
  • Average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls decreased by 1 cent to $22.99. Again, this does not bode well. Not only are we seeing a jobless recovery, but a wage-gain-less one, too.
  • Hiring in temporary help services was flat. Usually we see a bump in temp hiring that precedes more permanent hiring, so this is a disappointing figure too.

And now, the good news:

  • The number of people who are unemployed because they voluntarily left their jobs rose. So at least people are feeling freer to ditch jobs that they dislike … even if there aren’t better jobs available.

Sorry, that’s all I’ve got. Anybody see anything else uplifting in this report?

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=d68bd18c2dd1ccd3370438a0ad7ec054