I really appreciate the extent to which American laws make it difficult for employers to eliminate candidates based on factors that are irrelevant to the job.
In 2012, I considered applying for a fellowship in Israel. The application form required you to say whether you had consulted a mental health professional in the last two years and to list any medications you were currently taking and for what purpose.
In the United States, it is completely illegal to put questions like this on a job application form (and for very good reason). You are allowed to ask these types of questions after you've made an offer and even then you have to demonstrate that the person cannot do the job in order to rescind the offer.
I asked the organization why they collected this information, and they told me it was for the safety of the participants and that they "couldn't in good conscience" not ask these questions. I didn't apply for the fellowship.
A couple years ago, I spent a year as an English teacher in Guangxi Province, China. Hiring on the basis of physical or racial characteristics was very blatant in that area and industry. It's difficult for non-white laowai to get ESL positions, because many training centers choose not to hire those who don't "look like a native English speaker" -- either because the school administrators believe this, or they think it'll drive away parents/customers who think their child isn't getting a "real education" from a "real English-speaking foreigner."
It was a new and very uncomfortable feeling to be so blatantly valued (and used in marketing) for being little more than a white-faced billboard by the school/business I was working at.
Think about any other race trying for ESL jobs in Asia. One of my teachers was very upfront about it and asked me if anyone has ever spoke with me about being asian and trying to teach in Asia.
Never ended up doing going. It is marketing, and it's perceived to be much better to know American English than British English.
Resume info from other countries are also very different as others have mentioned. Mandatory pictures, age, gender, marital status, children, passport, driver's license, etc are all expected. It's scary to think how easily identities can be stolen.
Same as in Japan where im currently working as an english teacher. I see it quite often from management tdiscarding resumes from non-obvious english background people(by how they look).
The same thing happens in all of Asia. In Japan, you have to apply with a picture on your resume, and hiring managers will ask married women if they intend to get pregnant, because they won't hire them. I'm sure it's similar across other countries. My friend, who is white, and his wife who is Japanese moved to Japan and after 9 months came back to the US because the conditions were so bad compared to the US. Not only do they work you to the bone, the pay is incredibly low and you are subject to blatant sexism and racism.
I heard the other day that in Japan the employers routinely pay a percentage of a man's salary direct to his wife such that that portion money remains outside of his control. Maybe someone with a better idea of Japanese society can weigh in with some analysis.
Here in China, I don't think the problem's quite as bad as they make out in the article... only in government and some big businesses (eg. probably airline flight attendants).
I've never heard of a company paying an employee's wife directly (except after a death), but it is common for married salarymen in Japan to turn over their finances to their spouse. In return they are given kozukai or "pocket money/allowance" as a percentage as a way of curtailing unnecessary expenditures.
Not surprise to read this. The Chinese culture is a very racially discriminatory culture. Not only are suitable candidates for jobs selected based upon physical attributes and racial backgrounds, social interactions are also racially based, I am talking simple things like having sharing a table at a crowded eating place.
Even within the Chinese, they are separated into Mandarin, Cantonese, Hakka etc, each with their own cultural character.
Thankfully, the younger generations are starting to change this mindset as the world gets smaller via the internet and fast air travel. However, with hiring practices such as that mentioned in the post, it will may take a couple of generations before we see a significant change.
I remember seeing Chinese job postings on Indeed.com that included not only physical measurements for a receptionist position, but also attractiveness requirements. It totally surprised us (we were in the US), but I guess it's a cultural thing? Then I realized that 60 years ago, US job postings probably had the same kinds of requirements.
I think you may be misconstruing the purpose of the poster. In my opinion, it's mostly about the low-risk and high-upside potential of using the temporary workers that Kelly Services offered much more than physical qualities.
"... Here is more detail on a widespread phenomenon in China dubbed “carrot job ads,” for the notion that each job can be filled by only one, very specific, person, just as each carrot fills just one hole in a garden: ..."
Isn't this the way software/hi-tech companies hire in the west?
I've been trying to think for a while of a comment that explains or even defends this from a cultural perspective but there's nothing. while this probably doesn't reflect public policy or the aspirations of the Chinese people, it's just another of those signs that for all the trains/sports stadiums/airports being built, Chinese society is still sometimes the kid of idiocracy we would associate with the UK a hundred years ago. it's a shame.
Aren't some jobs legitimately asking for certain traits in their workers? Just as actors and models are in fact sometimes hired by their looks, why is it wrong to ask that when the specifics of the job depend on it.
Just to clarify; I'm not trying to defend unreasonable job conditions.
It's for the civil service. Office jobs. Museum workers. The article lists "women might be afraid of the dark, so we can't hire them for a job that would have night shifts" as a reason.
The newspaper even reminds us from time to time how discrimination of this type is against Chinese law (but then free speech is also protected by the Chinese constitution so....). I made some fuss once about Hep. B carrier discrimination. And let's not even get into minority discrimination (can a Uighur get a job?).
It is a China-bashing lens. The article also complains about:
"the location of a person’s “hukou,” or residency permit"
Employers in every country do this and we don't call it "just wrong" (though it is). They use the more international form of a hukou known as a passport.
Western companies also have hiring discrimination based on social abilities and who your friends are, even when it's of only minor relevance to the job. A person's personality is considered worth discriminating against (even for jobs working alone) but that isn't automatically more acceptable than physical characteristics.
I'm glad I can then at least judge it through various other cultural lenses. People think it's a load of bullshit in China as well (unless they're good looking and get the job of course).
I've walked around in Taipei (where people seem particularly short) every so often you see some westerner who's 6'4 or so (do people still measure themselves with 'feet' any more) walking around - a head above everyone else - they do look weird. (I'm a westerner who's considered 'short' in the west and 'tall' there).
I'm afraid that in the right context you are a freak :-) but yes height shouldn't be an issue
That is the kind of argument a 13 year old would make on tumblr.
Somethings are better than others, not discriminating based on gender, where the gender doesn't matter for the job, is strictly better than discriminating based on gender.
Seriously if this happened in the US you would be up in arms, the Chinese should not be allowed to be different.
> Somethings are better than others, not discriminating based on gender, where the gender doesn't matter for the job, is strictly better than discriminating based on gender.
Prove it.
> Seriously if this happened in the US you would be up in arms, the Chinese should not be allowed to be different.
Should not be allowed by whom? Last I checked, China wasn't a US state. Are you going to pick up a rifle and go conquer it?
Oh, it's a religious belief. I'm curious to know why you and the poster above think you can forcefully bring your faith to the Chinese. Is China not a sovereign country? Does the strength of your conviction override geopolitics?
Why would male police officers have distinct height requirements? To the extent that one might have a reasonable argument that height is a bona fide job qualification for a police officer, why would the minimum acceptable level be different by sex?
In 2012, I considered applying for a fellowship in Israel. The application form required you to say whether you had consulted a mental health professional in the last two years and to list any medications you were currently taking and for what purpose.
In the United States, it is completely illegal to put questions like this on a job application form (and for very good reason). You are allowed to ask these types of questions after you've made an offer and even then you have to demonstrate that the person cannot do the job in order to rescind the offer.
I asked the organization why they collected this information, and they told me it was for the safety of the participants and that they "couldn't in good conscience" not ask these questions. I didn't apply for the fellowship.