The case of Spain

Well ok then. I'm not sure what there is to "win" but in my mind your position would be more convincing if you had some supporting evidence. Simply saying "I don't think so" and "I don't believe it" will only take you so far.

 

This isn't debate team. There is no winning. When you make a statement on a forum you submit it for public scrutiny and comment.

Really? Because I'm tired of people, who refuse to keep their skills current, constantly insulting the qualified and hardworking employees of foreign origin who move across the globe to pursue career opportunities.

I get very tired of everyone acting as if employers are trolling the slums of Calcutta to pluck people out of poverty so we can pay them just above minimum wage to do professional level work. Because, you know, even the poorest of the poor in the third world are all competent programmers.

These are not unskilled laborers being rounded up and thrown into a mine. These are skilled professionals with training at globally recognized universities. The bulk of foreign hires are recruited from U.S. universities, in fact. Look on a website like visadoor.com and explore what some of those salaries are and how they compare to their U.S. counterparts. You might be surprised at the fact that these folks are not being hired at a discount especially when you consider the time and expense of bringing them into the country.

But people will still whine and complain that it's the fault of the HR person, the company or society because their expertise lies in obsolete tech and they don't want to have to spend time and energy keeping current. Always the fault of someone else.

My company has a subscription to Lynda.com. Any employee (including part-time and temps) can get in and learn something new. Do you know how many employees, of roughly 25,000, have signed up to use the service? 500. And, of those 500, 83% reported that they received either a promotion or a lateral move into a more technical skill area within 1 year of signing up.

Does that mean Lynda.com is the key to employment? No. Because I'd wager that those individuals aren't just using Lynda. They are the ones signing up for the numerous company sponsored learning opportunities. They are the ones availing themselves of tuition assistance. They are the ones going out after work and learning new skills to advance their careers. And when you have that sort of attitude it shouldn't be shocking when you see that group moving up rather than out.

Is unemployment always the fault of an individual? No. Not at all. But it is the employee's, not the employer's, responsibility to find a way out of that pit. Can't find a job? Acquire new skills. Taking two years "off" to earn a Masters degree is generally not the answer especially in tech areas. Earning a masters, while employed, can help your marketability. But the marginal increase in marketability you receive from a Masters, which isn't required for most tech jobs, is offset by a two year employment gap. In the world of tech a two year gap is about as damaging as listing your probation officer as a reference.

I will try to overcome my grief.

 

but what if your P.O. is a nice guy who'll say good things?:saroll:

 

I have a colleague who works for a non-profit finding recently released convicts work. He said that the first thing he needs to tell people is that they should never list a P.O. or a fellow felon as a reference.

 

So now I have to re-write everything!

 

Let me just clarify...

1. I was being somewhat cheeky

2. If you include a P.O. as a reference it tells the employer two things right off the bat:

a. You are on probation/parole
b. You didn't have better references​

That being said, I have hired employees who are on both probation and parole. And I have worked with their respective Officers. But those employees didn't list them as references (the only thing they can really say is that they are compliant which is evident by the fact that they aren't back in jail).

The ideal job reference isn't just a character witness (that's why we don;t want to talk to friends and family). It's someone who can attest to your professional skills. A former manager, a co-worker, a client. These are all people who can tell me what sort of worker you are. Do you show up on time? Do you work hard? Are you a team player? What is your probation officer going to say? That your latest urinalysis came back clean? Any time you don't list former managers and co-workers it strongly suggests that you are trying to hide something. When you start really scraping the bottom of the barrel it raises red flags. Examples of that barrel scraping would include people who have listed the realtor who helped them buy/sell their house, HR people from companies they never worked for (usually friends), neighbors etc.

This non-profit that my colleague works for is actually pretty interesting and I support their mission. They secure contracts with the state and federal government for things like janitorial work, food service etc. When a person gets released from prison they are referred to the program. The non-profit puts you to work for 6 months (low pay, but paid). During that time they coach you on everything from the basics of professionalism to how to fill out a job application and conduct yourself during an interview. Then they have people go out and try to find jobs (typically en masse) in which to place their graduates upon reaching the end of the six month run.

When you hit the job interview you have a list of references from the non-profit. These are people who actually saw you work and worked closely with you. These are the types of references most employers are looking for. Since many employers in New York don't ask about criminal history it means you can potentially just slide in without even a second glance. If they do ask, you should obviously be honest, but that employer has the comfort of knowing that this isn't the first job out of prison. They were able to cut their teeth on a starter job before arriving and they have people, who actually worked with the person, to vouch for them. You can imagine why their success rate is higher than individuals left to their own devices.

Beyond that, some POs are not exactly warm and fuzzy. And some really get off on the ability to send a person back to prison. I once had an employee whose P.O. conducted so many site visits (sometimes multiple per day) that there was no possible explanation other than he was hoping we'd fire him because of the inconvenience and he could send this guy packing back to prison. What happened instead was our VP of HR got on the phone with the county probation department, whose head sat on a non-profit board on which our VP also served, and the problem was resolved. Not every ex-con gets that sort of support.

But all cynicism aside, even if your PO is the greatest guy in the world and believes in you with every fiber, I still wouldn't list him as a reference. If you are asked to disclose criminal convictions for the job and providing his information will help to assure the employer, then maybe, but that's a case by case basis sort of thing. At first glance the sight of a PO on a job application is more likely to stir up bias and unsubstantiated fear than to actually help you.

That's also almost entirely my own opinion though some of it was formed from direct experience and the rest in working with this colleague.