Employers Are More Tolerant of Long Jobless Spells When the Economy Is Bad

Facts matter: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. Support our nonprofit reporting. Subscribe to our print magazine.

Tyler Cowen links today to a new paper that, at first glance, comes to an unsurprising conclusion: the longer you’ve been out of work, the less likely you are to get a job interview. Employers generally figure there’s a reason that someone has been out of work for a long time, so resumes and job applications with long jobless spells usually get tossed aside. This is, obviously, especially bad news during a recession, when lots of people have long periods of unemployment through no fault of their own.

But if you look a little closer, the study (here) has a bit of a silver lining. It turns out that when the economy is in good shape, employers do indeed discriminate against job applicants who have been out of work for a while. That’s the blue line in the chart below, which shows that applicants initially get callbacks about 10% of the time, dropping sharply to only 4% of the time after they’ve been unemployed for eight months.

But take a look at the red line. That’s the callback rate when the economy is bad. The overall callback rate is lower, as you’d expect, but it also doesn’t go down as sharply. It starts out a bit above 5% and then declines to a bit below 4%. That’s still a drop, but not a huge drop. Apparently, when the economy is bad employers really do cut some slack for people who have been out of work for a while. I’m actually a little surprised by this, but it certainly makes sense.

On the other hand, if you’ve been out of work for a year, the state of the economy hardly matters anymore. It’s just really hard to get anyone to give you a chance.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate