Applications versus resumes
Frenchie
116 Posts
I attended a Human Resource Management seminar last spring where they advised having everyone who is interested in employment, whether solicited or not, complete an application. The reasoning was that you get more information on an application and you have dated proof of when it was completed. Our current practice is to only accept resumes when we have a position available, and we only have individuals we are thinking of hiring fill out applications.
I'd like to know what others are doing. We are a small company (less than 100 associates) in Ohio.
Thanks.
I'd like to know what others are doing. We are a small company (less than 100 associates) in Ohio.
Thanks.
Comments
Although I think for administrative positions a resume tells you a lot about a candidate "between the lines" that an application may not tell you, (i.e. attention to detail, spelling ability, writing ability), and since the applicant is required to sign it, the "good" application is the legal document you can use to verify prior employment and education, as well as describe your conditions of employment. I've actually been able to eliminate potential candidates based on the fact that either they outright lied on their application, or they stretched the truth a bit. That certainly tells you something about their character (or lack of).
We will accept resumes/applications for open positions and only require an application on final candidates.
Unsolicited resumes are not retained.
Some companies will allow people to complete applications all day long 365/24. Those of you who want the additional burden of being required to maintain those applications as required by law and track them and have them available for government inspection, should do what the siminar speaker suggested.
The rest of us will only allow an application to be completed when there is an announced position, a current recruitment window and an application period ongoing. And the application is completed by those whom the company either intends to interview or hire, is my suggestion.
When we advertise a position, we receive resumes via e-mail, FAX, snail mail, or drop-ins. Most don't have the posted qualifications for the job. Those that do, get the opportunity to complete our application and be interviewed.
I totally agree with your last paragraph.
"The rest of us will only allow an application to be completed when there is an announced position, a current recruitment window and an application period ongoing."
If you follow OFCCP regulations, that quoted sentence will cover the times you are required to take applications.
You must keep resumes received in response to those announcements as well, but you are not required to call in for interview all those who send or drop off resumes.
Jaded: It is true that the employer defines applicant. In so doing, the employer excludes from the applicant pool those who send unsolicited resumes by trashing them. In that respect, they do not become applicants and no consideration of the resume need be granted nor tracking done. If you do keep resumes on hand, rather than trashing them upon receipt, you have chosen to redefine and expand your applicant pool under the Executive Order.
Hope this clarifies my position. Thanks. x:-)
I understand what you are saying and we don't keep unsolicited resumes either.
We recently advertised for two social work positions and received a slew of resumes of which only a fraction were contacted. How should I track the statistics for the resumes we didn't interview? Write in Unknown?
Tks, Barbara
It sounds like you had a "reasonable" Compliance Officer (C.O.). I have gone through several reviews throughout my 15 years with this company. Most of the time, the C.O. is reasonable. However, in the last review, the C.O. took over 6 months to complete his review. He was the one who made a big deal out of using the postcards.
My earlier post was to make sure people understand that resumes can be considered applications in the eyes of the OFCCP.
The issue is more complex when we post job openings (as is required by OFCCP) with Employment Security offices and minority sources. Those agencies keep track of the number of people they refer to you.
When I post job openings with these agencies, I give them a lengthy job description and list qualifications required for the position. This allows me to "narrow the field." I only interview the qualified applicants and of course I have a time line I use to limit the number of responses. However, I do log the resumes as applicants and note the referral source and why they were not interviewed.
By the way, this same C.O. could not find fault with our 16-point file but he did think we had discriminated in our pay rates. He wanted backwages for three minority employees. We fought this (without an attorney) and prevailed in the end but not without hours and hours of my time and tons and tons of paper documentation to prove our point.
The bottom line is this: An OFCCP Review Officer can be an HR person's worst nightmare!
I REALLY hope that none of you every have the opportunity to go through one of these.
Dutch2
Your suggestion that this process is discriminatory is correct. However, it is not illegally discriminatory. Employers discriminate every day. Part of my job is discriminating between the resumes of those who meet the qualifications and those who do not. I don't waste the time of those who do not. They go in 'Stack B'.