Stifling Job Hunting in the U.S.A.

According to an article posted today at CNNMoney.com, "Federal regulations kick in today that will make Internet job hunting more complicated."

More complicated? It's a lot worse than "more complicated". As near as I can tell, the federal government wants to increase the unemployment numbers and effectively stifle successful job hunting, at least in the tech industry (where I am). They claim to be setting guidelines "meant to standardize how employers track data on the diversity of their job-applicant pool". Instead, I think some of the unintended consequences will be that employers will start seeing an increase in Stepford resumes, each one eerily "perfect" and identical to the others.

New federal guidelines meant to standardize how employers track data on the diversity of their job-applicant pool are taking effect starting today for jobs at federal contractors -- and similar rules will kick in later this year at U.S. companies with more than 50 employees. ...

In the new system, federal regulators will be checking to see that companies are keeping diversity data on all applicants, according to a new, more uniform definition of "applicant."

According to this definition, an applicant must "express interest" in the job, whether by sending in a resume, applying on the company's site, or whatever other means the company requests... That "expression of interest" must show that he or she has all the qualifications for the job listed in the company's job description (not just some or most of them) -- and those qualifications must be specific and measurable.

Obviously the legistators haven't applied for a job in a long time — and probably never in the high tech industry. I've discussed this problem before. Many companies like to play Buzzword bingo in their job descriptions. They know they have a lot of work to do and they realistically could use two or three people to handle the load. Unfortunately, they don't have the headcount to hire two or three people. So they lump the qualifications of all three projects into one job description and cast their net.

I usually feel pretty good if I match 90% of the requirements in a job description! Don't get me started about "specific and measurable".

To comply with these new rules and get the most diversity, employers will have an incentive to keep the pool of applicants for each job relatively small and as random as possible. To make sure you're considered now, you'll have to:...

Spell out your qualifications clearly. "Pay very close attention to the specific qualifications an employer lists for a particular job, and make sure your resume contains those exact words," Crispin says.

For instance, if a job description includes the words "three years of credit accounting experience," put "three years of credit accounting experience" on your resume. "Don't just list a credit-accounting position with the dates you had it and assume someone will figure it out," Crispin advises. This may mean you have to rewrite your resume for each job opening you apply for.

That's not a job application. That's a set of rules for entering a contest. You "win" if all of your numbers match (sounds like the lottery system). A computer could choose the candidates.

Shouldn't alarm bells go off in an intelligent hiring manager's head if every candidate matches each requirement word for word? There's more to hiring an employee, especially in the information technology fields, than how well he or she can cut and paste phrases from a job description into a resume!

Even if you're a perfect match, why assume that every line of a job description carries equal weight? Perhaps the hiring manager was indulging in a little wishful thinking when he or she wrote that job description. Why insist that a candidate be a perfect match for a job description when there are no guarantees that the job description itself is not imperfect?

I once interviewed for a job where the job description was written by 6 managers. Each manager concentrated on his or her own, specific, areas of interest. Apparently I convinced everyone I would bee a great fit; I got the job. Then I discovered the truth — not one of those managers was willing to accept anyone else's interests or desires. Where the job description was composed of the union of 6 sets of requirements, the actual job allowed me to perform the almost nonexistent intersection of those duties.

I wonder if it would it meet the federal guidelines if, before sending, I were to simply paste the current job description at the top of my resume under the heading

I can do this