I've been looking for work for exactly two years as of today. In that time I've filled out hundreds of applications, gotten a handful of interviews, filled out numerous assessment exams, and lost hours of sleep worrying about when the next check will come in.
When I first started applying to jobs 10 years ago, it sucked but at least there was more to apply to. Back then, I had almost no experience outside of my schooling. Now conversely, the more experience I gain, the harder it become to apply simply because there are less jobs. I, along with a thousand other applicants, hit "submit" and if we’re lucky, someone will look at our resume and cover letter for at least 10 seconds before moving on.
It's really not the fault of HR people. They're just as overwhelmed as we are. The system simply isn't built for what we're all dealing with now. Job applicants trying to find work are like of passengers trying to get on the lifeboats of the Titanic before the boat’s inevitable collapse, except the Titanic is sinking every day.
And this is a problem because it's causing people to give up. Unemployment is itself a job, because every day you go to work to change it. You fill out the application(s), you're told to keep a sunny presence online, you send emails to "the right people" (people you admire, people who work at the company you applied to, etc.) and constantly hustle. Maybe you take a contract job training A.I. or a catering gig to pay a bill. Anything to keep the spigot flowing.
In the meantime, your actual passion is stifled. The work you want to do gets further away, and the projects you say you'd do - the novel, the script, etc. - become luxuries. Why else do you think there are so many "nepo babies" in entertainment? They're the only ones with the economic security to do what they love. The rest of us are too busy worrying about the next thing.
So if you’re an HR person reading this, here’s 11 suggestions for how I would make things easier for job applicants:
Update your ATS systems. All companies should use Greenhouse, which is the best. (If I have to fill out one more thing in Workday, I swear to God…)
Be transparent about the ATS system you do use. Explain up front what it’s scanning for so that we don’t spend $100 on a bullshit seminar from a guy who teaches us how to put “keywords” in white font for the ATS to pick up on. Doing this will debunk a lot of myths around these systems that I believed until only recently. It’ll also put a lot of grifters out of business.
Pay the people you interview, or at the very least, pay for the assessment test. Interviewing and/or doing assessment tests requires a great deal of work and research to get right, sometimes hours. That time should come with financial compensation - not an ungodly amount, but enough to let people know you appreciated the time and effort.
Don't require us to explain work gaps. Respect and understand the fact that this market is insane right now. Many of us experiencing gaps don't *want* to be experiencing them.
Closely related to number 4, be careful how you ask applicants about freelancing. I once had an interview where someone asked me why I was a freelancer. He meant to express admiration for the fact that I’d built up a portfolio of freelance clips, but what I really wanted to say was “it’s not like I have a choice.” Freelancing can be great, but few of us do it because we want to; most of us do it because we have to.
Never ask someone why they want a job that’s (on paper at least) lower level than their experience suggests. I’ve been asked this before, and it’s a hard question to come back from because it gives the impression that the interviewer has already decided we’re not the right fit. It also doesn’t take into account the reality that many of us have to look for jobs beneath our experience level because the more well-paying, prestigious ones simply aren’t open. If you want to tell someone “we think you’re a little too senior for this,” wait until the feedback letter.
The further a candidate gets in the interview process, the more you, the HR person/interviewer/etc., are required to provide feedback when you send them the letter saying you’re going with a different candidate. It's one thing if a person only does one interview and then they move on, but if they make it to the final round, or even just the assessment exam, then you should tell them why they weren’t chosen and offer tips for how to do better. Stop making them “rejection letters” and make them “feedback letters” where you offer candidates practical tips.
If you do reject someone, don’t ghost them. I did two McKinsey interviews in 2023 and I’m still waiting for my rejection email. Maybe they’re still considering me. Who knows?
Establish relationships with applicants. Yes, some of this is on the applicant, but hiring managers should keep us in mind for things. If they really like us, send us a link to an internal opening every so often. We’d be grateful.
Corporations should host events for job seekers. This isn’t practical for every corporation, but I think it would go a long way if, say, The New York Times offered meet-and-greets or events for aspiring applicants to hang out with and ask questions of experienced reporters.
Finally, be genuine. I’ve done interviews of all kinds and I know when someone is making the effort to connect with me versus doing it because they’re on interview duty that day. In a world where hiring teems seem like faceless blobs who pass on candidates left and right, being called in means that we’re seen. So see us, really see us - not as candidates or applicants or the unemployed, but as people - hardworking, talented, exhausted people - who just need to know that we’re appreciated.
I like your tips. I've been doing this a lot longer than you have and the main thing I've noticed is how uncivilized the process has gotten. Injecting a bit of empathy and common sense would make a world of difference. Good luck.