Why Is Everyone OK With References?

[Derek White]

I have noticed that references are immensely important in getting a job where I live. However, under the garb of wanting to know more about a candidate to get a wholistic picture, they end up being the cause of undeserved job hiring, elitisms, favoritism, nepotism and corruption. 

References are more important than merit. I have seen people as cashiers and front end workers who can barely speak English fluently, the only reason they got the job, it seems, is because they knew someone in the corporation who was willing to be their refence, and often times this turns into clusters of curtain ethnicities (and even family members) keeping certain departments all to themselves since people of the same community are more likely to reference each other. I personally know people who tried to get a job without a reference but where unable to, but got a job without the employer checking their resume once they could convince someone to become a reference within the company. I have overheard HR people who are involved in hiring saving spots for their "children's friend".

Isn't there a way to pass a legislation that puts a stop to such practices, especially ones where the reference is inside the company? There should be other ways to conduct the selection process without having practices that make it easier to enable favoritism in the name of lofty ideals. 

This seems like an important discussion but no one seems to be addressing it. 

[DefinitelyNotARobot]

Where do you live if I may ask?

Companies are privately owned. If a company chooses to ignore skill and hires based on reference only, it's their right to do so. Does it seem unfair? Yeah. Does a company have to be "fair"? Not really. They are not obligated to take you in, even if you are the best worker in the world.

I agree, there are problems with that practice. Not just in terms of the hiring process, but also for people within a company. This kind of practice could make it harder for people to move up within the company, because higher up spots might be given out to family members and that kind of stuff, but I honestly haven't noticed any systemic issue with this kind of practice. It happens, but I don't think it's the biggest problem workers face. But that depends on where you live. Maybe it's actually a systemic issue where you live.

Edited June 25, 2021 by DefinitelyNotARobot

[Derek White]

30 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotARobot said:

Where do you live if I may ask?

It  doesn't really matter, but somewhere in North America. I see clusters of a particular ethnicities and even families in some cases dominating particular fields by referencing each other. It makes it harder for talented new comers, immigrants, refuges, and under privileged people to survive.

30 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotARobot said:

Companies are privately owned. If a company chooses to ignore skill and hires based on reference only, it's their right to do so. Does it seem unfair? Yeah. Does a company have to be "fair"? Not really. They are not obligated to take you in, even if you are the best worker in the world.

This problem is not just in companies but also in the govt. jobs. Companies can have a contract with the govt. and the line can be quite thin sometimes. For example, someone I know worked for a company that had a contract with the govt. and it later got acquired by the govt. so the employees and the practices remained. This government organization also had the problem I mentioned. If I'm not wrong this kind of "corruption" is common around bureaucracies in the world.

But how far do you want companies to take this liberty In a world and economy dominated with privately owned companies? This would be and is grossly unfair, if would just keep the wealth and power in the hands of those who already have it and make it harder for skilled poor people from moving up society who lack networks in certain areas. It prevents social mobility and actually skilled and deserving people from coming up.

37 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotARobot said:

This kind of practice could make it harder for people to move up within the company, because higher up spots might be given out to family members and that kind of stuff, but I honestly haven't noticed any systemic issue with this kind of practice.

If you value merit than there are tons of systemic issues with this practice. We are basically saying whether on not you get a job is more dependent on who you know and less on your merit. There are so many problems if you think about it. The best people for the job are not winning in this system, it's the ones with contacts. 

If you are somebody who's parents didn't help you or didn't have a big network, you moved cities, immigrated, or people from your background don't know people in a particular field then the systemic problem really starts kicking in. Like someone is able to get a job at McDonalds because they got a family member working there, how is this not a systemic problem, meanwhile you can keep applying and won't get in. This is the definition of corruption. I guess if you believe in free market capitalism then it may not be a problem for you, but it is not a meritocracy and gives a upper hand to the privileged.

For example, the real estate agents in my area are part of various companies. They help sell and buy homes. What they do is they give preference to real estate agents who are from the same company, this way the money stays within the same network of people. Like if I'm a real estate agent who brings a buyer to an agent from a different company, the guy may raise the price for me because I'm not part of his company and lower it for a realtor he knows or is from his company. This makes things harder for the buyers and sellers. Perhaps this is not the best example and this is just one case. But there is a lack of honesty and fairness, people are getting ahead cause they are part of a privileged group, the best realtor is not winning in this situation and his customers are also losing.

[Leo Gura]

Humans are social creatures. Politics is always played. Who you know and befriend is always gonna be highly relevant to moving up the pyramid.

It's time to wise up about how social mobility works.

[Derek White]

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Humans are social creatures. Politics is always played. Who you know and befriend is always gonna be highly relevant to moving up the pyramid.

It's time to wise up about how social mobility works.

You can say that for any problem.

We would be better off as a society if we actually addressed it. Maybe there are places out there which do not have this problem.

We can definitely reduce its severity.

[Nobody_Here]

Nepotism was a problem for me as long as I let it be one. I thought I had no connections and wasn't related to anyone important. One day, I started utilizing my connections. It started with my boyfriend at the time (who I met on the internet.) He gave me a reference to a job that led to my current career. I make a salary in the high five figures and have experienced a lot of personal and professional growth. Then one day, I found out I am related to several historical figures. It also turns out Beyonce’ (yes, that Beyonce’) and Koryn Hawthorne (a gospel singer) are my third cousins. I saw Koryn singing at a local church and had no idea this person was related to me, so the experience in hindsight is kind of surreal. 

So what my experience taught me is that everyone has connections they can use and everyone is related to someone historical or famous. Even if it is not obvious who these connections or relatives are, you can still make new connections even if you're not sure where the relationships will lead.