I Just Found Out Why Nobody Wants To Hire Me

[Choppy]

Yes, employers mostly seem to consider local applicants, but the question is: how efficient and effective is actually the whole hiring process? I mean, taking all the precautions to hire the "best" candidate, how often does it turn out a good selection in terms of performance and employment duration?

This is a much bigger question.

I think one of the problems is that in the absence of any controlled testing, you can't really know who the "best" candidate is. And even controlled testing has its limits. Hiring is an extremely difficult optimization problem. At its basic level, hiring does tend to be more about filtering out the unqualified and the poor candidates as these are the ones for which there would be the largest consequences. But once you get to a short-list, it can be challenging to sort candidates.

I think this might be as least partly why you see this kind of thing (a preference for hiring local) happening under some circumstances. Once you have a pool of good candidates if the pool is too large, the filters become more subtle. Conversely if the pool is too small, there can be more flexibility in the filters.

Does anyone here actually believe that the hiring process is somehow "fair," that there is no discrimination based on gender, age, race, religion, or nationality, and that there is an attempt to find the "best qualified" candidate in some objective sense?

Yes.

While no human process is inherently bias-free, generally most people make an effort to be as objective as they can when hiring.

 

[Dr Transport]

Does anyone here actually believe that the hiring process is somehow "fair," that there is no discrimination based on gender, age, race, religion, or nationality, and that there is an attempt to find the "best qualified" candidate in some objective sense?

Best qualified and cheapest are not mutually exclusive, in many cases the best qualified will command a higher salary which the company will not want to pay.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Get a PO Box close to the potential employer. List it as your address, but in a way that makes it ambiguous whether it is an apartment or condo or townhouse number:

Joe Smith
455 Pleasant St. # 458
Houston, TX 12345

Odds are they won't google the address to learn it's just a PO box and will be left with the impression that you live in town rather than an unacceptable commuting distance away. For various reasons (identity theft, harassment, stalking, etc.) we've been keeping our actual residential address private from parties which do not have a real need to know for a number of years - and this includes employers, churches, customers, students, banks, credit card companies, and so on. Only our closest friends, family, and utility providers know our actual residential address. Most parties that have our mailing address (a PO box) don't even realize that it's a PO Box and not a residence.

 

[symbolipoint]

Dr. Courtney,
I have some trouble understanding what you describe about the postal address. A STREET address shows a street address number, street name, city & state, and zip code; maybe too, an apartment number of suite number. This is very findable using any of several maps. A POST OFFICE BOX address only shows P.O. Box number, and then City & State, and zip code. Not findable in the same way, since one may locate the post office but the resident is not there - only reports there periodically to pickup mail.

You can explain what I'm missing. Maybe your point is that one can get a p.o. box in whatever city is desired no matter where near or far one lives from that post office?

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Dr. Courtney,
I have some trouble understanding what you describe about the postal address. A STREET address shows a street address number, street name, city & state, and zip code; maybe too, an apartment number of suite number. This is very findable using any of several maps. A POST OFFICE BOX address only shows P.O. Box number, and then City & State, and zip code. Not findable in the same way, since one may locate the post office but the resident is not there - only reports there periodically to pickup mail.

You can explain what I'm missing. Maybe your point is that one can get a p.o. box in whatever city is desired no matter where near or far one lives from that post office?

You can list any PO Box with the street address and the # without specifying that it is a PO Box in this manner:

Joe Cool
777 Garden Circle #124
Dallas, TX 45678

You do need to show up in person to show your ID to the clerk at the post office, pay the fee, and pick up your key.

You also need to show up periodically to pick up your mail. How often depends on how much mail you get and how big a box you rented.

We've had PO Boxes in cities where we lived an hour or more away and only picked up mail at several times a year. In the South, lots of folks prefer to do business with "local" businesses. At various times, we've had "local" addresses in Lake Charles, Baton Rouge, Clemson, Atlanta, and Gainesville at the same time. Most of these were PO Boxes addressed as above with the appearance of street addresses. As we travel for our consulting businesses, it also allows us the flexibility to have clients mail checks or important papers to the one we happen to be close to for pickup in a timely manner.

 

[CrysPhys]

You can list any PO Box with the street address and the # without specifying that it is a PO Box in this manner:

Joe Cool
777 Garden Circle #124
Dallas, TX 45678

You do need to show up in person to show your ID to the clerk at the post office, pay the fee, and pick up your key.

You also need to show up periodically to pick up your mail. How often depends on how much mail you get and how big a box you rented.

We've had PO Boxes in cities where we lived an hour or more away and only picked up mail at several times a year. In the South, lots of folks prefer to do business with "local" businesses. At various times, we've had "local" addresses in Lake Charles, Baton Rouge, Clemson, Atlanta, and Gainesville at the same time. Most of these were PO Boxes addressed as above with the appearance of street addresses. As we travel for our consulting businesses, it also allows us the flexibility to have clients mail checks or important papers to the one we happen to be close to for pickup in a timely manner.

I'm a bit confused by this too. So, in your example above, is "777 Garden Circle" the street address of the local post office?

At any rate, given your above stipulations, this is not a viable approach, e.g., if you are an applicant in Boston willing to relocate anywhere in the country and applying to twelve jobs spread across the US (or even, say, one job clear across the country in Silicon Valley, if you otherwise have no reason to go there).

 

[CrysPhys]

Does anyone here actually believe that the hiring process is somehow "fair," that there is no discrimination based on gender, age, race, religion, or nationality, and that there is an attempt to find the "best qualified" candidate in some objective sense?

(1) Depending on the position, qualifications are based on a set of objective and subjective parameters; each parameter may be given a different weight. Some parameters (e.g., technical skills), may be objectively assessed (e.g., based on education and work experience, or assessed by giving the applicant a problem to solve or a task to perform). Other parameters (e.g., communications skills and personality traits ... affecting ability to work with others) are subjectively assessed by the interviewers, although there are some behavioral tests that try to test and quantify such parameters.

(2) In practice, often the goal is not to hire the "best" qualified candidate in some absolute sense (whatever that means), but a "reasonably" qualified candidate ... subject to the constraints of schedule and budget. If there is a sufficient pool of local candidates to select from, no need to look afar. If not, then the search area is broadened. E.g., in the late 1990's, at the height of the InterNet Bubble, there was a shortage of R&D scientists and engineers with expertise in optoelectronic devices for the telcom industry. Some US companies actively recruited overseas.

(3) Interviewers are human. As such, they bring their own sets of personal biases, conscious or sub-conscious, to the table when assessing applicants.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

I'm a bit confused by this too. So, in your example above, is "777 Garden Circle" the street address of the local post office?

At any rate, given your above stipulations, this is not a viable approach, e.g., if you are an applicant in Boston willing to relocate anywhere in the country and applying to twelve jobs spread across the US (or even, say, one job clear across the country in Silicon Valley, if you otherwise have no reason to go there).

It may not always be viable, but it often is, and it is certainly viable in response to the conundrum in the OP - an employer discriminating against potential employees with a drive longer than a certain amount into a specific metro area.

My proteges have also used it to good effect when applying for jobs unwilling to pay relocation expenses. Visit - set up local address (stealth PO Box) - use that on all application materials - thereby removing all temptation for employer to discriminate against an applicant because they are not local.

Lots of job markets are local and will discriminate against applicants outside of a certain radius for various reasons. The PO Box approach gives a means to apply from inside whatever radius you want. If you can't actually visit a place to set one up, a friend or relative can do it for you, but they need be the primary box holder and list your name as also receiving mail there. There may be some restrictions, but these can usually be worked out.

Lots of folks have fantasies about entry level jobs paying their relocation expenses and high starting salaries. The truth is, a local approach it more likely to yield many more entry level job opportunities, and the approach I've outlined allows targeting "local" jobs in multiple locations simultaneously.

 

[symbolipoint]

Great discussion from Dr. Courtney:

My proteges have also used it to good effect when applying for jobs unwilling to pay relocation expenses. Visit - set up local address (stealth PO Box) - use that on all application materials - thereby removing all temptation for employer to discriminate against an applicant because they are not local.

Lots of job markets are local and will discriminate against applicants outside of a certain radius for various reasons. The PO Box approach gives a means to apply from inside whatever radius you want. If you can't actually visit a place to set one up, a friend or relative can do it for you, but they need be the primary box holder and list your name as also receiving mail there. There may be some restrictions, but these can usually be worked out.

I just wonder how often that approach backfires,... AFTER the applicant is hired?

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Great discussion from Dr. Courtney:

I just wonder how often that approach backfires,... AFTER the applicant is hired?

Not sure how it could backfire if the new employee keeps their residential address private and shows up at work when they are supposed to. Long commutes need somespecial care - leaving early to handle traffic delays. A good standard operating procedure would be to leave an hour and a half early for a commute that is normally an hour. In some locations with particularly tough traffic, one may need to leave even earlier. But most employers don't care where you live if you show up on time and do a good job.

If one is particularly worried, one may also wish to use ID documents for the HR people that do not include a DL, which has to have an actual residence address in most states. Other than driving, a passport is the gold standard ID for every legal purpose and does not have an address on it.

 

[CrysPhys]

Not sure how it could backfire if the new employee keeps their residential address private and shows up at work when they are supposed to. Long commutes need somespecial care - leaving early to handle traffic delays. A good standard operating procedure would be to leave an hour and a half early for a commute that is normally an hour. In some locations with particularly tough traffic, one may need to leave even earlier. But most employers don't care where you live if you show up on time and do a good job.

If one is particularly worried, one may also wish to use ID documents for the HR people that do not include a DL, which has to have an actual residence address in most states. Other than driving, a passport is the gold standard ID for every legal purpose and does not have an address on it.

There may be an issue with state income tax withholding if your residence is actually in State A, but your PO Box is in State B, and HR has only State B on file.

Regardless, if anyone ever considers applying to a law firm for a job in IP law, I wouldn't recommend doing this: law firms take "duty of disclosure" seriously, and they likely wouldn't care for such clever little ploys.

 

[EngWiPy]

This is a much bigger question.

I think one of the problems is that in the absence of any controlled testing, you can't really know who the "best" candidate is. And even controlled testing has its limits. Hiring is an extremely difficult optimization problem. At its basic level, hiring does tend to be more about filtering out the unqualified and the poor candidates as these are the ones for which there would be the largest consequences. But once you get to a short-list, it can be challenging to sort candidates.
...

I found this interesting video by Jordan Peterson by chance, where he is saying that the employees selection process is highly biased and unstructured, and it is slightly better than random selection.

 

[Zap]

I think location does matter. I've been rejected from just a few jobs because they did not do over the phone interviews. Obviously, if you already live in the city in which the job is in, you're easier to hire than someone who doesn't.

 

[CrysPhys]

I think location does matter. I've been rejected from just a few jobs because they did not do over the phone interviews. Obviously, if you already live in the city in which the job is in, you're easier to hire than someone who doesn't.

Again, you can't generalize. Whether the current location of the candidate matters or not depends on, for example, the specific company, the specific job, the time frame within which a position must be filled, and the pool of available candidates.

 

[symbolipoint]

I think location does matter. I've been rejected from just a few jobs because they did not do over the phone interviews. Obviously, if you already live in the city in which the job is in, you're easier to hire than someone who doesn't.

Again, you can't generalize. Whether the current location of the candidate matters or not depends on, for example, the specific company, the specific job, the time frame within which a position must be filled, and the pool of available candidates.

Those are both reasonable practices or both true, depending on the conditions that CrysPhys mentions; but also true, easier to hire a local person than a not-local person. A company operating in a big city can find many local candidates likely to be qualified and suited for an open job.

 

[CrysPhys]

Those are both reasonable practices or both true, depending on the conditions that CrysPhys mentions; but also true, easier to hire a local person than a not-local person. A company operating in a big city can find many local candidates likely to be qualified and suited for an open job.

<<Emphasis added.>> Not necessarily. A few years ago, when I was working as a patent agent for a law firm on the East Coast, I got a call from a headhunter who asked me whether I was interested in moving to Chicago. For some inexplicable reason, there were around 4 law firms looking for patent agents with my technical background and experience. Now understand that law firms almost never pay relo for patent agents. But the firms couldn't find anyone suitable in the Chicago area, and were willing to pay for my relo, if I turned out to be a suitable candidate. So individual instances vary a lot.

 

[symbolipoint]

About relocation and who is and who is not in the local company area, THIS is the major idea linking the two:

So individual instances vary a lot.

 

[WWGD]

This is bull. We just made an offer to an engineer living 55 miles away, in the Bay Area. This will be a 2-hour commute each way if the candidate accepts. Nobody cares where a candidate lives unless funds aren't available to provide relocation. And at any rate, no company will give relocation to someone 45 min away so this story is a just-so story.

2-hr commute for a 55-mile trip?

 

[gmax137]

2-hr commute for a 55-mile trip?

Do you think that's too long, or too short?

 

[WWGD]

Do you think that's too long, or too short?

Seems too long, 27mi/h. Maybe I am assuming there are expressways in the area which would allow for some 50 mi/hr plus some 10-15 minutes after exiting it. Even if using city roads it seems kind of long. But I admit I haven't looked at actual data.

 

[WWGD]

Yes. My screening process is based on statistical probabilities in order to save time. I will inadvertently reject some excellent employees in order to do my job quickly and efficiently. I am more concerned about accidentally hiring a loser, a dud, or someone that can cause trouble for the company.

Workers who live far away may pan out just fine, but it's not the norm in my experience. They usually burn out or quit, and I don't see much benefit in taking a chance when there are plenty of candidates from whom to choose.

In my experience it is more a matter of both the type ( public or private) and number of "legs" in the commute , e.g. a commute consisting of driving followed by public transportation, etc. is much worse than a commute of the same length of a single leg, specially with public transportation where you can do some work on your way to home ( and back, if needed).

 

[TeethWhitener]

Seems too long, 27mi/h. Maybe I am assuming there are expressways in the area which would allow for some 50 mi/hr plus some 10-15 minutes after exiting it. Even if using city roads it seems kind of long. But I admit I haven't looked at actual data.

I have a pretty standard commute in a US major metro area (45-60 min one way on an average day) which includes city and highway driving. My current car (a 2013 Toyota Corolla bought new) records average speed, and I’ve only reset it a handful of times. It currently reads 27 mph.

Edit: this speed is actually probably a bit high for my everyday commute, which is only 18 miles or so.

 

[WWGD]

I have a pretty standard commute in a US major metro area (45-60 min one way on an average day) which includes city and highway driving. My current car (a 2013 Toyota Corolla bought new) records average speed, and I’ve only reset it a handful of times. It currently reads 27 mph.

Edit: this speed is actually probably a bit high for my everyday commute, which is only 18 miles or so.

I am likely off, given I have taken public transportation most of the time.

 

[symbolipoint]

Alike to the current topic's drift,
I knew some people who traveled by their own automobile, 50 miles each way to and from work. That is far, but it was also what some people were willing to do. Not everyone will tolerate such a commute.

 

[WWGD]

Alike to the current topic's drift,
I knew some people who traveled by their own automobile, 50 miles each way to and from work. That is far, but it was also what some people were willing to do. Not everyone will tolerate such a commute.

But don't you think the "1-legedness" helps, i.e. not having to change modes of transportation? What burnt me out was having to take one train, wait for a second one in the cold and then walk. Had it been a single train ride, I could have handled it and even work during the commute.

 

[Nik_2213]

Been a while, but I discovered I'd probably beaten out several 'better qualified' applicants because I had two mostly-reliable bus routes available. One tediously trundled around the city circumference, was almost door to door. The other, to be caught a brisk walk away, was an express, based at a different depot, and ran through the city centre...

 

[Zap]

I think it could matter and it could also not matter. There are too many hidden variables here. I would relocate even if it wasn't paid for, but sometimes even that might not matter. I think in the majority of cases, it doesn't matter for a good decent paying job, assuming you're a qualified candidate. For low paying jobs, it matters more. For example, if you have an interview at McDonalds, but you live 1,000 miles away from the restaurant. You're not getting the job, unless you want to travel 1,000 miles to the interview. I think the OP is BS because that can't possibly be the number one reason for not being able to find a job, even though it is a factor. There are a hundred other factors. Maybe he chews his lips during an interview, and they said, well heck we can hire this other guy with zero obsessive compulsive habits who happens to live closer. Who knows. Location can't be the number one reason. If "they" (extraterrestrial beings) want to hire you, then they'd hire you, or at least ask you to move closer. Unless of course it's for a job that doesn't require qualified candidates, like the aforementioned scenario at McDonalds.

 

[CrysPhys]

Been a while, but I discovered I'd probably beaten out several 'better qualified' applicants because I had two mostly-reliable bus routes available. One tediously trundled around the city circumference, was almost door to door. The other, to be caught a brisk walk away, was an express, based at a different depot, and ran through the city centre...

<<Emphasis added.>> This thread is getting a bit bizarre. What exactly did you find out? The employer evaluated several candidates; asked each of them details of their planned modes of transportation; and picked you because you had the most reliable, even though you were otherwise less qualified?

 

[CrysPhys]

In my experience it is more a matter of both the type ( public or private) and number of "legs" in the commute , e.g. a commute consisting of driving followed by public transportation, etc. is much worse than a commute of the same length of a single leg, specially with public transportation where you can do some work on your way to home ( and back, if needed).

But you missed the entire point of David Lewis's posts. He initially filters out resumes by zip code. He doesn't want to waste any time getting involved with the intricacies of anyone's commute. So a candidate living outside his geographical area of interest never gets the opportunity to explain why his commute may not be a problem (e.g., you live next to a train station and can take an express; and the destination station is a short walk to work).

 

[pinball1970]

I just found this article and find it ridiculous, but I guess it can be a real, but sad factor.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lizrya...out-why-nobody-wants-to-hire-me/#bc7fb028866f

Yes it’s a factor.

Law of averages says the further you are away from work, the more chance something that something can go wrong between A and B and delay you or stop you from getting to work completely.

Also you have to get up earlier and a long drive is effectively dead time and or stress time.

If you are on public transport at least you can reads mails, chill and read book or even sleep but you still have to get up earlier to make your bus/train.

I would say very long drive look to move, car share or public transport if you can join the dots and its cost effective.

 

[WWGD]

But you missed the entire point of David Lewis's posts. He initially filters out resumes by zip code. He doesn't want to waste any time getting involved with the intricacies of anyone's commute. So a candidate living outside his geographical area of interest never gets the opportunity to explain why his commute may not be a problem (e.g., you live next to a train station and can take an express; and the destination station is a short walk to work).

Yes , I meant it more as a side-comment; will try to stay on track in any additional post I make.

 

[StatGuy2000]

It's interesting that no one in this thread has made any comments whatsoever on telecommuting (i.e. working from home). An increasing number of jobs these days can be done remotely from any location with readily available Internet access, thus allowing employers to no longer be bound by geography in terms of hiring decisions.

I work for a company which has employees located all over the world, across 3 continents, all working remotely. All meetings are held via Skype or Webex, and I meet with clients via the same methods as well. This takes the commuting factor out of the equation entirely.

 

[vela]

Seems too long, 27mi/h. Maybe I am assuming there are expressways in the area which would allow for some 50 mi/hr plus some 10-15 minutes after exiting it. Even if using city roads it seems kind of long. But I admit I haven't looked at actual data.

I have a commute that’s about 55 miles long twice a week. Most of it is on freeways, and it takes me about 1.25 hours one way. I fortunately don’t encounter much traffic. If I did, it could easily stretch into the two-hour range.

 

[WWGD]

I have a commute that’s about 55 miles long twice a week. Most of it is on freeways, and it takes me about 1.25 hours one way. I fortunately don’t encounter much traffic. If I did, it could easily stretch into the two-hour range.

Ok, but then that is a rate of 44 mi/h, significantly higher than the 27 mi/ h from Crys' commute.
.

 

[vela]

Ok, but then that is a rate of 44 mi/h, significantly higher than the 27 mi/ h from Crys' commute.

Yeah, but I don't run into significant traffic because of when and in what direction I make the commute. If I had to drive 55 miles north of where I live at 7 AM, it could easily take more than two hours.