Equity and fairness in job seeking

One of the main functions of HR is to search for suitable individuals, attract them, and employ them into their organization(s) (Recruitment and Selection, the most important HR function, 2013).

Recruitment is the process of gathering a pool of individuals for a job vacancy. Selection comes after recruitment, and it involves screening and picking the right fit for the job. Before these processes, jobs are posted or advertised on various platforms to search for competent talents.

Recruitment and selection are very crucial interconnected constructs that HR departments and managers should pay particular attention to. Sang and Ngure (2018) assert that “human resources are a key source of competitive advantage” (p. 1), and so hiring a candidate serves as the “ticket” to the potential success or failure of an organization. That said, such practices should be strategic, with the experience being made enjoyable for all applicants.

Research records show that for any organization to be considered professional, its recruitment and selection processes should be based on ethics. The procedure should be fair and just, based on merit, and not discriminatory. Justice and equity are vital systems in HR recruitment that impact an organization. Adam (1965), the proponent of the justice theory, proposed that employees experience both distributive justice and procedural justice. The former describes how

Resources and rewards are disbursed on the promise of an individual worker making inputs toward organizational goals.

Procedural justice, on the other hand, refers to how management implements

its procedures in an equitable manner. People feel treated justly if management’s decisions are impartial, non-discriminatory, and just. For the purpose of this write-up, procedural justice is adopted to describe some conduct job seekers experience on their job search expedition.

This commentary is to bring to light some HR recruitment and selection practices and some psychological influences of job search on job seekers. information contained in this write-up can stimulate research and in-depth HR discussions in the area of organizational behaviour.

Work: A necessity of life:

Individuals in society are expected to work to provide basic needs for themselves and, in other cases, for their dependents, and in the process of meeting this expectation, they are to actively search for jobs commensurate with their training. Their search for a job is not to only receive monetary benefits but to also enjoy an overall eudemonic experience. There are three categories

of Job seekers and they comprise; 1. New entrants, 2. Those who have experienced job loss and seeking reemployment and 3. Turnover. The first category of job seekers are individuals who have just passed out from an educational institution in search of jobs that match their training.

Those seeking reemployment, being the second category, are individual job seekers who have involuntarily lost their jobs and are proactively in search of a new one, and the third category is those persons who have intentionally left organizations they used to work for in search of more challenging opportunities. These 3 groups who carefully put in applications for jobs are assumed to be aware of the job market and the various recruitment and selection procedures generally used. Irrespective of assumptions, every organization’s HR department is required to do a job analysis which plays an essential role in hiring. This procedure also assists in ensuring fairness and equity in the recruitment and selection process.

Psychological factors involved in job search:

Ever been on a job search and felt injustice? These events usually occur when individuals are actively hunting for employment. After going through a rigorous process of putting in an application, one hopes and expects to be invited for an interaction one way or the other upon satisfying the requirements advertised for the position. Human resource experts employ several selection techniques to hire the most qualified applicant out of the few chosen from the initial pool. Selection methods such as aptitude tests, cognitive ability tests, knowledge tests, interviews, reference checks, and medical tests among others are some of the enormous techniques used to pick the necessary skills required for the job.

Through all these stages, individuals who have applied for a particular job experience a rollercoaster of emotions. A mixture of stress and anxiety are a few of such mental health-associated issues individual job seekers might encounter during the process. Stress leads to burnout which can impact the executive functions of the brain. Burnout often occurs as a result of putting in effort from overwhelming demands without receiving significant feedback (Montanez, 2019).

Individuals put in a lot of effort and motivation to chart a particular course, in this case, securing a job. Managing to receive positive feedback from recruiters is motivation to set the ball rolling for job seekers, but, going through the various stages of assessment and not given a choice not because of their negligence but because of an assumption is ethically incorrect.

There have been instances where individuals partake in an assessment and score exceedingly which merit them moving to the next stage of having an interview. The panel approves of the demeanor, knowledge, skill, and abilities of the individual and even goes ahead to express interest in a potential employee. Only to be informed that the application process was unsuccessful based on unsatisfactory comments from a minority out of a list of previous employers.

This is an unfair and skewed judgment. This information alone can damage the emotions and total well-being of the individual. It can impact one’s self-efficacy and even motivation to look for new opportunities. Procedural justice is flawed because treatment was given not based on fair procedures but because of some remarks of an external system.

Why should substantial weight be placed on feedback, be it positive or negative, of just 1 referee provided? Did it nullify all the pleasant characteristics observed from the painstaking assessments? Is it really worth losing such a possible asset to the organization based on an individual or competitive organization’s perception? After expressing interest, both verbally and

non-verbally, in the candidate and later sending a disappointing mail rejecting them is psychologically wrong.

It also does not speak well of the organization and puts its reputation at

stake. After all, labour conventions give room for probations; where one is made to perform normal work duties upon employment for a specified amount of time after which they are confirmed, affirmed, or given full employment status in the firm. Probation is a “grace period” recruiters employ to verify their satisfaction with the employee. Employees are studied in every aspect to

determine if they are the right personality the organization needs and wants.

Granted the employee is not in an appropriate frame to fit into the position, probation affords employers the opportunity to correct their mistake and not repeat it in the future.

Implications of unfair judgements:

Unknown to most employers, potential employees are also stakeholders and unfair treatment meted out to them could tarnish the image of the organization in question. Employers must place utmost priority on the emotional and mental wellness of candidates which can have a trickling effect on the organization’s existence, as well as on society. Fairness and justice as well as integrity should play an important role in recruitment processes because unfair treatment can be a threat to individuals’ general outlook on work, organization, and even society.

All the best to anyone in search of a job. You are simply being redirected when you are not accepted. Keep pushing! You will arrive at the best fit. Employers should also be mindful of how potential employees are treated. You may not know the repercussions of being unfair.