"Increasingly rigid job and person specifications"

This had been a comment on "21st century welfare" chapter 2 "Problems with the current system", a link which was on the DWP's own website back in 2010 (however now removed - edit Jan 2018). Most of the discussion is about "rates of welfare dependency and poverty" and "work incentives being poor", ie part time hours on mininum wage with regard to top up benefits. So much discussion of welfare reform does centre on blaming (a) unemployed people for not being willing to take jobs (b) the complexity of the system preventing the ones who ARE willing from taking many lower paid and/or part time jobs. No mention of the employer's role in this equation! First there have to be the jobs to take though, difficult enough in the current climate, then factor in the willingness of employers to offer them to some people who may not meet the criteria 100%, and I'm not just talking about disability here. This comment ties in with what I've often said about the need to re-educate employers. The writer touches on "Increasingly rigid job and person specifications" and the "human resources driven ‘closed shop’ mentality of employers", I've often wondered that many 'human resources' bods sometimes don't pass applications to the line managers that they might actually be interested in if they were to see them. How many applications / interviewees are turned down having only been interviewed / application seen ONLY by an HR bod and not the manager who would be responsible for them if taken on? Very good post, and standing out in that it focuses on the employer for once.