Last year I interviewed for a job and did not get it (obviously). The HR person I interviewed with was one of the worst examples of HR ignorance and arrogance I have ever encountered. The HR person was young and very self-important. It was obvious the "I have a job and you don't, and I am in the position of making or breaking your opportunities for employment" aspect of the HR - candidate dynamic had gone straight to the ego. But I sucked up and played the game and got through to the second and third round of interviews, which went well.

The hiring manager (in an executive level position) was very nice, she even actually phoned me to explain the only reason they didn't select me for the position was because the other top candidate had the exact client experience in the industry of their top client. She wanted me to know that I was perfectly qualified and a great candidate and a nice person, perfect for her team, but the other candidate had very specific client experience so it made more project sense to hire the other candidate. I understood, and I thanked her for personally following up with me. She told me she'd send me any other openings that might open up and encouraged me to keep applying at her company.

Good to her word, about six months ago she sent me a job posting and I applied, and received a standard rejection email from HR. Then, last week she sent me another email with a newly posted job and suggested I apply. I thanked her profusely and spent three hours carving out a thorough application. I mentioned the hiring manager who sent me the job postingUnder the "How did you hear about this position" section.

Today I received this email from the ignorant, arrogant HR person:

We received your application for [ABC job] at [XYZ, Inc.].

After reviewing your candidate file we discovered you were not selected for two previous positions at [XYZ, Inc.]. You will not be considered for the [ABC job]. This is your third strike. We have removed your candidate profile from our database. All future applications you submit to [XYZ, Inc.] will be similarly deleted. [XYZ, Inc.] feels you are not an appropriate fit for our company culture.

True, this wasn't a form rejection email, which is refreshing. When you spend significant time and thought on a job application it's nice to have a personal response. And I always appreciate candor and constructive advice. And I like that he didn't hide behind a generic signature, he took full responsibility for the rejection email by signing his name and three, count 'em three, lines of a job title. (Ever notice the correlation between age and job titles? The younger, more junior level the person, the longer and fluffier the job title.)

It's certainly the most blunt rejection letter I've received, so kudos there, too.  Message received, loud and clear. I'm not an [XYZ, Inc.] kind of person. If I were basing my opinion of [XYZ, Inc.] solely on the HR person, I would wholeheartedly agree that I am not an appropriate fit for their company culture.

However.

There is the matter of the woman who suggested I apply to the position. She is the polar opposite of the HR person. So I'm confused as to what [XYZ, Inc.]'s culture is. Is it the snide HR nitwit, or the pleasant, professional executive? Is she a lone wolf, a renegade who doesn't fit in at [XYZ, Inc.], or is the HR person an jerk wielding what little power he has over lowly job candidates who are no threat to him?

The executive is far senior to the HR guy.  If I were an angry, spiteful, sore loser I would forward the rejection email to her. But I'm not angry or spiteful. I'm the kind of person who routinely earned good sportsmanship awards and got extra civics points.

I could query her with my actual sentiment: Confusion. "Thank you for suggesting the [ABC position], I applied and was summarily rejected. Perhaps I was not the right fit for the position, and it seems HR feels that I am not the right fit for [XYZ, Inc.], either. I very much appreciate your efforts in suggesting job postings to me, but I am now confused as to whether or not I should proceed with any future openings."

Apart from the HR nitwit, I would very much like to work at this company so I don't want to burn any bridges or come off in any way unprofessional. Going over the head of an HR person with an overinflated sense of importance is never a good idea. I learned that lesson a long time ago. And the rejection email is very clear. There is no gray area nor room for interpretation.

Some will say, "Trill, you have nothing to lose. Forward the email to the nice executive who suggested you apply to the position. If take this HR ninny down in the process, so bet it. You're doing a lot of people at [XYZ, Inc.] a huge favor."

And I would agree with that point of view, but...coming off as a snarky backstabber is not the optimal image to cultivate when one is in desperate need of a job.

So. Another day, another job hunting farce. 


“Would it save you a lot of time if I just gave up and went mad now?”

Another day, another seven, count 'em seven job rejections.

I'll have to refer to my spreadsheet and run the numbers, but I believe that's a one-day record.

Six of them used the same three sentences all HR departments send to rejected candidates. I know them by heart.

We wanted to follow up with you on the status of your application for the position of [whatever].  While we were impressed with your qualifications, we have decided to pursue other candidates who are a  closer match for the position.

Please feel free to apply for other open positions that you are interested in.

Apparently there are a lot of candidates with professional backgrounds that are a closer match than I am to the position of working a 4 AM shift of donning a hair net and and plastic gloves and putting pre-made frozen bagels and bread into ovens and removing them when the timer beeps.

Apparently there are a lot of people who are a closer match than I am to the position of opening boxes, counting items, placing an "x" in the received column and placing them on a shelf.

Apparently there are a lot of people who are a closer match than I am to an after hours position of cleaning and sanitizing a day care.

Apparently there are a lot of people who are a closer match than I am to managing the exact same type of clients I managed in my last job. (actually, that's probably true - there are a lot of us and most of us are unemployed)

The seventh, and most recent (hey, the day's not over, there could be another rejection headed my way!) offered insight as to why I didn't get the job.

Regarding your application for the position of creative services manager.  While we were impressed with your high level of qualifications, we have decided to pursue a more creative candidate

Okay, in my field that's a common rejection reason. Employers are often looking for a very specific "look" or creative methodology in a candidate's book of previous projects.

But get this: The company that rejected me today because I wasn't creative enough is a company that distributes industrial construction supplies - lag bolts, concrete saw blades,  bull pins, that sort of thing. Mind you, they do not manufacture, design or have anything to do with the items other than distributing them. Further, during the three interviews I had with them, it was stressed that the position is primarily updating existing materials (which consist primarily of product listings and price sheets). They don't want to reinvent their marketing plan because the existing "plan" works and since they have a good relationship with the state and federal construction purchasers. They supply materials to government construction projects, so the job requires handling two sets of pricing structures, government and non-government. The "government, and non-government" factor was repeated and emphasized several times during the interview process.

The irony is that during the interview process I kept thinking, "They don't really need a creative services or marketing person because they're happy with what they have and they don't want to change anything other than pricing."

I went in there brimming with ideas, but when I asked questions like, "Have you tried something like XYZ?" Or, "Do you target 123 audience?" They cut me off with, "We don't do that. We're very content with our current pieces. We really just need someone to manage the updates and make sure the sales team has current price lists."

And yet they rejected me because they are pursuing a more creative candidate.

Us job seekers are supposed to use rejections as valuable insight. We're supposed to glean wisdom and take rejections as advice on where we need to improve ourselves and our skill sets.

Okay, I'm not creative enough. I'm not creative enough to update price sheets, maintain two sets of price sheets (government and non-government) and make sure the sales team has current information.

It isn't even worth wasting one of my WTF free passes on this.

If they were an agency with clients spending $$$ and expecting trendy or sophisticated design and innovation, I would completely understand. Those types of jobs require someone with very distinct project and client background and a very particular vision and dynamic strategy. But these people don't even swutting manufacture anything. They order construction materials from manufacturers, put them in boxes and re-sell them to construction purchasing agents. Further, they don't want to change anything, by their own admission, they're "very content with our current pieces." And, they "really just need someone to manage the updates and make sure the sales team has current price lists." I could understand if they said, "We're pursuing a more boring candidate." Or, "We're pursuing a far less experienced candidate." Or, "We pursuing a candidate with government contract experience." But they didn't say that. They said they are pursuing a more creative candidate.

I can't let this stuff get to me, and I rarely do, but every now and then the rejections are so nonsensical that I think it must be me, it must be something I really do not understand, maybe there's a language barrier or maybe I just smell funny. But I need to learn what it is that I don't understand. Because I really, really, really need a job. 

Geeze, seven rejections in one day? Good grief. Anyone read anything about suicide rates among the unemployed lately? I stopped looking at that data because it was too upsetting to me. But if you're wondering why or how someone could kill themselves over a job rejection, now you know. It's frustrating, confusing and nonsensical.

I dunno. I really do not know what to do. Obviously I'm doing something very, very wrong in the job hunt and I would love (love) helpful personal insight and advice as to what I'm doing wrong, what skills I need to acquire, what personality traits I need to develop...anything.  

I have this idea. And I trust your opinion. So I'm running it by you.

Picture this:
Seven or eight or eleven laid-off professionals who have run out of financial resources and lost their homes live together in a McMansion that's bank-owned. The individuals are followed as they try to find: jobs, food, healthcare, etc. on only the limited (or no) financial resources they bring with them. The only thing they're given is a place to live. Internet connection, food, utilities (including phone) are not included, they have to sort those things out for themselves, either individually or as a group, that's up to them to decide. So yes, it's possible the show could be filmed in a completely dark house if they can't pay their electric bill. (Which could be kinda funny, the production crew would have to use a generator to power their equipment.*) The only way to be "eliminated" is by securing a full-time job. If/once a house member gets a paycheck from a full-time job they have to either leave the house or a portion of their paycheck is "shared" among the other house members for shared expenses like the aforementioned utilities. If a housemember gets a job and chooses to leave, they'll be replaced by another laid-off professional.

Working titles:  Harsh Reality 
This is the Real World, Baby
Shelter Me
Darwin House

Would you tune in and watch it every week?

I know, I know, reality TV is (thankfully, finally) dying.

But this is more of a documentary mixed with aspects of the more successful "reality" shows like Big Brother, Survivor, The Apprentice, Amazing Race and insert cooking/designing skills challenge show here.

Yes. This is somewhat self-serving because I need a job and place to live, and creating this show and/or being one of the house members would solve a couple of my immediate and pressing issues. And yes, that's what spawned the idea.

But. The more I think about it, the more I think it might actually be a good idea. It's a relatively low budget investment for any network, heck, PBS could do it. For the low, low price of working a leasing deal with a bank on a foreclosed home (of which there are millions all over the country) (or, better still, someone with a foreclosed or negative equity home could donate it and get the charitable tax donation credit) and a production crew, a network has a gripping, very real reality show. It would be the antithesis of the Kardashians, which, I think, would have huge appeal to anyone over the age of 22.

Why would any network want to gamble on this? Well, for starters, a little tax shelter called  501(c) status, for a start. Oh yes, charity. A) They're helping keep down neighborhood blight by leasing (or heck, even buying) a foreclosed home; B) They're helping the economy by taking one foreclosed property off the bank dole; C) And not least, they're giving unemployed homeless people a place to live. So it's not just a homeless shelter, it's a tax shelter! (Hence the possible title Shelter Me.)

And D) There are opportunities for some of the warmest, fuzziest moments on television. Yes, there's an uncomfortable schadenfreude morose aspect (okay, a lot of uncomfortable morose schadenfreude aspects), but there are loads of opportunities for "triumph of the human spirit" moments, too. Imagine the moment an unemployed mother whose children have been separated and are living with far-away relatives lands a job which will pay her enough to provide and care for herself and the kids and she reunites her family. Imagine an unemployed middle manager who's handy with gardening organizing a garden and the unemployed sales rep taking the produce from that garden and selling it at a farmer's market, with help from the unemployed marketing person. Imagine an unemployed copy editor helping an unemployed systems analyst rework his resume so it reads more approachable and showcases a broader skill set. Awwwww, working together. Isn't that adorable?! How resourceful people can be when they get creative and work together! We can all learn from these people!

And better still, imagine the moment a laid-off teacher with a background in special needs education finally lands a new job teaching autistic children. Imagine the moment the former call-center manager who was laid -off due to foreign outsourcing two years before her retirement gets a call with a job offer to manage a customer service department. Imagine that systems analyst discovering a new career path in CAD software design. Heck, maybe they'll network amongst themselves and use each others' resources to find jobs - that laid-off teacher may have a sister in advertising who knows about a job opportunity for the marketing professional. We hear a lot about networking, and that it's who, not what, you know that lands jobs. Maybe this could showcase whether or not that's true or even a factor.

Yes, yes, I know. Those glorious success moments will be few and far between. There will be far more disappointing moments when the housemembers receive the news they didn't get a job they interviewed for three times. The rejection moments will far outnumber the rejoice moments. But. That's reality. (Wanna see my spreadsheet detailing over 2,000 job applications/interviews and subsequent rejection?) There will be some issues and behaviors people who've never been unemployed for more than a few weeks won't understand. It will be uncomfortable to watch. Like depression behaviors such as prolonged sleeping and/or sleeplessness; like crying jags; like weight gain and weight loss; like sudden development of health issues such as migraines, stomach ulcers, high blood pressure and dental issues stemming from teeth grinding while sleeping; like the matter-of-fact way suicide is mentioned as a solution; like the profound isolation from society that occurs when you have no job and no money; like the obvious slow evaporation of the soul and transformation into a passionless hollow shell. Yeah. It's not pretty. But what I've come to realize and (unfortunately) understand and accept, is that the cliché is true: Unless you've gone through it you do not have a clue what it's like. You can imagine that it's awful, you can sympathize, but until you go through it the depth and range of issues and emotions are beyond comprehension. I would not wish it on anyone, and I mean anyone. Which is why I think it's important to spend time beyond the 5 minute newsbites and online forums to showcase what it's really like to be laid-off and homeless, let people observe and learn about the many (many) facets that aren't showcased.

And that also includes what happens when you do finally get a job. Finally being hired after prolonged unemployment is, of course, a triumph. But. You have lost your home and all of your financial resources...and you have horrible credit. And when you apply for anything - an apartment lease, utilities, a cell phone, a car loan, to name a few - the first questions are "current address/length at address" and "current employer/length of employment." When you have been homeless and unemployed those questions become huge hurdles. Throw in your social security number for a credit check that shows a bankruptcy, foreclosure and a lack of income for over a year and you've got some serious hurdles to overcome. You have a job, and that's great, but, you have to live somewhere and get to and from that job and with only a couple paychecks under your belt that can impossible. Which is why I included the option for people to stay in the house after they land jobs. Getting back on their feet will take a while. Having a place to live until they have a few months of current employment and a current address to show for themselves can make a huge difference for someone trying to start over after a prolonged lay-off. See? This wouldn't just showcase desperation and poverty, it offers viable solutions to challenges unemployed people face when they finally do land a job.

It can offer insight into some complex emotions. When a housemember gets job offer, the others will react in different ways. Some will view as hope for the rest and will be happy and share in the joy of triumph. Some will see it as proof of God and His love. Some will be resentful. (They hired him? Really?) Some will vent passive aggression. (Gee, that's great. Really. That's just great.) Some will fall further into depression. (Always a bridesmaid, never a bride, always the second choice never the hired.) It could be interesting to see if these reactions mirror their reactions to other issues, and if so, it could offer helpful insight to individuals. It will also show not only how some people are more resilient than others, but offer insight as to why some people are more resilient than others, even with the same problem and same odds stacked against them. You know, like LOST. (You're starting to realize I may be really onto something here, aren't you.)

And, of course, there are many opportunities for the ever-popular clash and standoff moments. A housemember isn't sharing or contributing. Someone gets sick and can't afford to see a doctor and infects everyone in the house with strep throat. A housemember has a car but won't volunteer to drive a transportationless housemember to a job interview. It's discovered a housemember has a drinking problem and is hiding booze and drinking themselves to sleep every night. A housemember gets a weekly care package from an aunt and hides and hoards Ramen Noodles and Twizzlers (ahem).

I know, I know!!!  I cannot believe no one's jumped on this treasure trove of television opportunity! Whenever I think about all the aspects of this I think, "Geeze, Trillian, you're either effing brilliant or you're really stupid for not seeing an obvious reason no one is doing this."

It's also an opportunity for truly real reality. Very in-the-moment topical real reality. The house members aren't wannabe actors. They're not vying for cash prizes or a spouse. They're trying to find real jobs so they can get back to living their normal lives that were rudely interrupted and shattered by a company downsizing or outsourcing. They're not given anything other than a roof over their heads, so they have to do something, figure out a way to eat and pay utilities and transportation, it's not "hey, come live here in this luxury home/hotel with all expenses paid and then have sex and fight with the other housemembers!" It's "here's a roof over your head, a little nicer than your local homeless shelter, but no food, booze, utilities, maid service, healthcare, transportation or anything else will be provided, and in return we get to film you while you're in the house and watch as you figure out how to eat and cover living expenses and transportation, etc., and we'd like it if you bear your soul once in a while." 

Another possibility is to have three Darwin Houses in different parts of the country. Again, not a big expense and very easy since there's virtually no part of the country that doesn't have foreclosed homes and unemployed people. This would compare and contrast the job market and homelessness issues in different regions. (For instance, in Chicago the heating bill would be a major challenge for the housemembers.) This would also broaden the scope of the housemembers which would provide more demographics, hence more opportunities for home viewers to relate to a particular housemember.

And, dreaming really big for a moment, if this television experiment works then there's a real chance it could be put into action in communities all over the country. Use those foreclosed or negative equity homes to help the unemployed rather than just let them sit there or be auctioned to profiteers hoping to turn them into rental income. And of course give laid-off, homeless people a place to live and a new network of living resources. They can share resources. At the very least they'll be less isolated which is a huge factor in suicide. Unemployment half-way houses, if you will.


I ran it by a couple of my friends to mixed reaction. One thinks it's too depressing, "people don't want to be confronted with that kind of reality. People watch TV to be entertained, to take their minds off problems like that." The other thought it might make for a better two or three part actual documentary about several unemployed people. Catching those harsh reality moments that happen before arriving at the Darwin House, like when their cars were repossessed or when sheriff comes to padlock their house might better showcase the intended issues. (I agree, there's a lot of griping melodrama to be had in the backstories, and maybe there's a way to combine them.)

That focus group is kind small and maybe not comprised of a good representative sampling of viewers, hence my request for your opinion. I'm looking to broaden my focus group before I work up an actual pitch.




*(Which is the one aspect of reality TV that interests me, the production/camera crew and what they endure to capture those reality TV moments. I've always thought a show about a reality show production crew would make for good TV.)

From the, "What Not to Do to/for/with/in front of Your Unemployed Friends and Family" rulebook:

Do not, under any circumstances, forward your unemployed friends newsclips like this:
He-Covery

I think this was sent to me (by three different, unrelated people) in hopes of making me feel "better" about my unsuccessful job hunt, or maybe it was sent in an effort to "explain" why I'm having such dismal results. In one case it was sent to me in a rage of feminist outrage, "How dare they?! This is so wrong! When did Earth change rotational direction, reversing time and taking us back to 1956?"

Okay, I mean, you know, solidarity to the working sisterhood and all that, but, clips like these don't make me "feel better." And they may explain a small portion, a factor, of "why" I'm still unemployed. But. Believe me, I've already figured out that there are biases in hiring. I am already well aware that the jobs "out there" are in industries for which I am utterly unqualified. I don't mind learning construction jobs or auto mechanic jobs or any other "traditional" male job. But a) the training is expensive or nonexistent and b) I am physically unable to do many of those jobs and c) the reality is that traditionally male industries are traditionally male for a lot of valid and sound reasons. Gender bias in hiring is one of them.

I am seriously considering getting an over-the-road license. Yep. Truck drivin' Trillian. I'm going to be homeless, and being a long haul truck driver doesn't require a home, I like to travel, and I don't mind long drives, so, I'm looking into legit truck driving instruction. But even in my inquiry calls and emails I've been ignored or even flat out told, "We only take a limited number of women in the program and we're already at capacity."

As for the huge increase in men in the retail workforce, some of it is probably gender related, but, it speaks to a much more significant employment crisis not covered in that clip: Many (most) of the jobs "out there" are low-paying, part-time retail. Many (most) people cannot pay for rent/gas/food working a low-paying retail job. But many will grab one of those jobs if offered because it's something.

But that's not my point today. Today I just want to remind you that your unemployed friends and family don't need to see news clips like this. We know what's going on the the job market because we're in the job market and experiencing the hurdles firsthand. When we get an email that isn't a job rejection letter we hope that it's something interesting or funny or cute from a friend, something that will give us a few minutes respite from our constant searches/fears/hopes in the dismal job market. If I hadn't already encountered gender bias (or suspected it), this clip would have only further depressed me. But, because I am treating the job market as if it were my full time job (because until I find a full time job the job market is my full time job) I have already read the statistics and experienced outright, blatant discrimination. So this wasn't "news" to me. Either way, I didn't need three people (or even one) sending me the link.

Another day, another sleepless night borne of confusion, frustration and anxiety.

Yep, just another day in Bizarro World. 

I met with yet another recruiter yesterday. Her agency has a job with a confidential employer. The employer is one of those companies you might have read about recently. One of the companies that has implemented a rule about hiring: Currently employed candidates only. No unemployed candidates need apply.

"Why, then," I asked the recruiter, all innocence and confusion, "am I here? I'm unemployed."

"Because you're perfectly qualified for the job. And we are obligated to send them a certain number of qualified candidates. We have one currently employed candidate who's qualified and interested in the job. And we have several hundred mostly qualified candidates who are unemployed. Among them are a few standouts and you're one of them."

"But am I not categorically unqualified because I'm unemployed?"

"They don't need to know that."

"Ummmm, okay, so, what's my story? Where have I been working the past 17 months? Who are my references for that job and, heh heh, what's my current salary? Heck, maybe I don't want to give up this fictitious job I've had for the past 17 months!"

"We can get creative with your history. We can tell them you want to keep your job-hunt confidential, that you have concerns about word that you're job hunting getting out at your current job. In this employment climate that's a common issue, people are looking over their shoulders, no one who has a job wants any cloud of doubt over them in the office."

"I not comfortable lying like that. You said I'm qualified as is, why can't we just leave it at that?"

"Because they are very rigid in their 'currently employed candidates only' policy. They mean it. They've had this policy for over a year. It's the main reason they're using a recruitment agency instead of letting their HR group handle the candidate search. It keeps their hands clean."

"Have you sent other currently unemployed candidates to them? Have other people lied about their employment status?"

"A few."

"Did they get hired?"

"Ultimately they weren't the best fit, but not because of the exaggeration of their employment status."

Exaggeration of their employment status.

Buzzwords for the new decade.

Don't let anyone know you're unemployed.

As if we unemployed aren't carrying around enough guilt, shame, anxiety and fear.

You know when every instinct you have is telling you to flee? This was one of those situations.

I know recruiters regularly "groom" candidates they send to employers. But it's been established that I don't need much, if any, "grooming." I'm a good candidate, a viable candidate. So why the lie? Do I want to work for a company that has such ridiculous policies? If they have a "currently employed candidates only" hiring policy, what other cringe-worthy policies do they have? But mostly my concerns and instinct to run were about the lies that would be told if I went through with an interview.

I think the recruiter sensed my urge to run.

"We're willing to cover for you. We believe in you. You want a job. This job is a great opportunity for you. They want a qualified candidate who is resourceful, current and can hit the ground running. That's you. It's a win-win-win situation. Except for their hiring policy, which, by the way, we do not agree with, so this is an opportunity to beat them at their discriminatory game."

"We're sticking it to The Man."

"Exactly! See? You get it! What do you say? Shall we start adding a few lines to your resume?"

Exaggeration of my employment status.

Cripes.

When real life starts making the hypothetical ethics questions in the game Scruples seem tame and outrageous you know things have taken a serious turn for the bizarre in your life. Things might be a little out of hand. It might be time for some evaluation. And re-evaluation.


I'm no stranger to creative resume-ing. Over the past year various recruiters and career coaches have told me, not suggested, flat out told me, to play down and out-and-out eliminate many of my academic and professional credentials. Every recruiter has said something like the one I talked to a few months ago, "You have fantastic credentials. But. We're not going to showcase everything you bring to the job. On paper you look too educated and too experienced. Too perfect. You look fake. We need to dumb you down on paper otherwise interviewers will be intimidated or disinterested. They'll think you want their job, or, they'll think you won't stay on the job long because you'll leave for something better."

Again I ask, imploring to the Universe, when did s college education and relevant professional work experience become a liability?

And aren't these lies by omission? If I get hired based on a dumbed-down resume I have to remember to never, ever mention the education and work experience that were left off my resume. If they find out I have more education and experience than I represented in the interview...I mean...this all gets really weird.

Misrepresenting yourself in career terms used to be a polite way of saying you lied about your credentials, padded them, made yourself look more educated, more experienced than you really are. Now it's a polite way of saying you lied about your credentials, unpadded them, made yourself look less educated, less experienced than you really are.

Can you imagine that scene playing out in an HR office?

"We're letting you go."

"But, but, I'm doing a great job, I had a great review last month, what's the problem?"

"It's come to our attention that you misrepresented yourself when you interviewed for this job."

"I, I can explain..."

"Did you honestly think we wouldn't find out that you have a masters degree and worked at [prestigious company] managing 20 people?! How dare you insult us like this!"

"...it's just that I really wanted this job and I like it here and..."

"And you lied! You got this job under false pretenses."

"Wait. Wait. Let's be reasonable. You're firing me because I'm overqualified?"

"Yes. And because you misrepresented yourself at your job interview."

I weep for the future.



And now it's being suggested that I lie about the fact that I'm unemployed...and looking for a job. I'm being asked to lie about being employed so that a company who needs to hire someone with my education and experience will interview me.

If you can figure out the reason and logic in that please explain it to me.

You know how when a person files bankruptcy there's a public notice? It used to be a shameful thing to do. People filing bankruptcy would try to leave town under the cover of darkness before the public announcement hit the local newspaper. If the shamed bankrupty-ee didn't get out of town in time the local villagers didn't show up with pitchforks and torches, but...the gossip, contempt and judgment was impossible to live down.

In small towns it's still kind of that way, I think. Though not in the past few years attitudes about financial struggles have changed.

At least that's what people told me. That's what I hoped.

And then one of my neighbors, a woman who lives down the hall from me, confronted me in our hallway with a pitchfork and a torch. A verbal pitchfork and torch.

She's angry that our condos have fallen in value. She needs to assign blame and I'm conveniently unemployed and three doors down from where she lives.

Miraculously I have not gone into foreclosure. Yet. I keep hanging on, every month it's a nailbiter to the mortgage payment deadline finish line. I've robbed Peter and paid Paul, I've drained every penny of my 401K, I sold everything I had of any value. I've pawned things that have deep sentimental value. I do every odd job, every teeny tiny freelance job I can find, anything to make money.

The "real" job hunt? Sigh. On it goes.

I've begged for jobs that pay less than minimum wage. I've applied to night-shift 7-11, gas station and janitorial jobs. I've offered to work for free, literally FREElance my services in hopes of impressing employers enough to eventually hire me. I volunteer. I network. I call and email HR people, CEOs, managers of every description. I go on interviews...and get the, "it's down to you and one other candidate, we like you but s/he has more this/that/other experience" rejection. And if one more potential employer tells me I'm overqualified...I dunno. I mean, half the time I'm already lying about my education and work experience. Lies by omission, that is. I dumb down my credentials so I'm not as "impressive." When did education, experience and singular career dedication to a profession become such a liability?

No, I haven't worked retail or waited tables. Ever. Why? Not because I'm spoiled and didn't "have" to do those jobs. It's because I worked really hard to land jobs, any job, in a field related to what I wanted to do for a living. In high school I bugged the ad manager of the local newspaper to hire me to let me do anything - anything in the ad department (that consisted of three people). In college I worked the overnight shift at printing companies and learned a lot about the production aspects of advertising, and a lot about cost factors which, to this day, helps me accurately estimate budgets. I worked in galleries, often for free, so I could meet artists and photographers and learn that side of advertising. I mean, I was on a mission to learn everything possible about all the aspects, I wanted to be a professionally viable, well versed job candidate when I came out of college. And now that professional motivation and career drive is working against me.

"So, you've never actually stocked a shelf/folded sweaters/worked for tips?" is the first question I'm asked when I apply for retail jobs.

"Well, no, but, I have designed and produced retail store signage and advertising."

"We get all that from corporate. I need someone with floor experience. Retail sales."

"I understand. And my experiences from the merchandising and advertising side will give me a unique perspective on the floor. I see the bigger picture. It's not just about selling a sweater, that sweater is the end result of a highly sophisticated merchandising and advertising campaign that was well over a year in the making. It would be an honor for me to be a physical part of the end result of that effort. It all comes down to exchanging goods for money, and to be there, be part of the exchange, what all that merchandising is about, the culmination of a long cycle of marketing, I mean, it's like being there at the birth of a child." (Too much? Such is my desperation to persuade assistant store managers to give me a chance at a minimum wage job.)

"Sorry, I need someone with actual retail sales experience."

"I can stock shelves or do in-store displays...I'm a hard worker, I like to be busy, I'm friendly and I have a fantastic customer service attitude!" 

A few days ago that can-do attitude garnered this response from the afternoon assistant manager at a local DIY store:
"Sorry, I feel for you, I really do. My brother has a bio-chemistry PhD and 12 years experience at a pharmaceutical company. He's been unemployed for two years. I can't hire him, either, he doesn't have retail experience. Corporate pushes us to hire either young high school or college kids with little or no experience, or, retail professionals with lots of retail experience. We don't have good longevity stats with other types of employees. I have applications from people who have worked retail and they're more right-qualified for the job than you are. You seem friendly and eager and I'm sure you can do this job in your sleep, but on paper you're not qualified. The side-by-side comparison to other candidates might seem odd, but I have to choose someone with actual retail experience over someone like you."

I appreciate his insight and candor. It's more feedback and insight than most retail employers have bothered to give me. But the end result is that I'm still unemployed.

Here's how bad it is: I've sold plasma. Okay? I used to donate blood at every blood drive at work. Now I sell it. I'm not proud of this. And I am surprised at how little cash plasma gets on the open market. I've done it twice and live in fear of what I might have contracted in the process but that's a blog best left unwritten. (The take-away: Don't do it. Selling blood is nothing like donating it and you don't "earn" enough money to make it worth the effort and potential disease.) I've tried to sell eggs (mine; human), I offered my services as a surrogate mother; it's illegal, but I'll sell a kidney if someone will pay the medical expenses and give me cash up front.

Every month I think, "well, old girl, this is it, this is the month I can't pay the mortgage." So far I've scraped by, if I'm lucky with a couple bucks to spare. A few friends and my mother are extremely generous in helping me - giving me extras of their staples, sending me care packages of toothpaste and toilet paper, taking me to lunch, letting me borrow their cars, paying me for odd jobs like babysitting or housesitting or converting their cds and dvds to digital files. Pride goeth before a fall, and I fell far, fast and hard so humiliation isn't an issue. Shame goes straight out the window when you're desperate.

So.

When my neighbor from down the hall saw me returning from the mailbox and said, full of snark, looking accusingly over her glasses, "Still unemployed, I see." Then, (making a theatrical look at the mail in my hand) "Is it Welfare check day?"

"Yes, clearly since it's 1:00 on a Wednesday afternoon and I'm home I have not found a job. But no, I don't collect Welfare and my unemployment benefits ended in October. None of your tax dollars are supporting me."

"Then how do you pay your mortgage?"

Okay. I've been friendly with this woman. But we're not close. She has a daughter around my age and I like the daughter. So I tolerate my neighbor's sometimes abrasive and judgmental attitude. She's of the "I'm right and I'm going to tell you I'm right" school.

I knew what was fueling her verbal pitchfork and torch. There have been several foreclosures and property auctions in our building. Consequently the condo values have plummeted. The average auction price is less than half the price I paid for mine three years ago - and I bought at a good time, my condo was a bargain when I bought. People were impressed with the amount of space and neighborhood I snagged at such a reasonable price.

What a difference three years makes. Even if I had a job and needed to sell for a job transfer I'd be in serious trouble. It's bad everywhere, of course, but buildings like mine have taken serious hits: The condos are mainly smaller - great for singles, young couples or seniors - so our building's main owner demographic is younger and mid-career professionals on the low to middle range of the income scale. Singles living on one modest income. And when a younger single person with a modest income loses their job...there's no backup. There's no spouse to help earn money. There's not a lot in the savings account.  If that person remains unemployed for more than a few months there aren't many options other than a short sale or foreclosure. Either way, the rest of the owners in the building take a home value hit as a result of a foreclosure.

I know this. I know all of this. I am well aware. But do I blame my former neighbors who, like me, were doing okay until they lost their job and couldn't pay the mortgage? Of course not.

And word of yet another auction on one of the larger units in the building spread like the black plague. The auction price was...disturbingly low. I've seen used cars priced higher than the final auction price on that condo. Nice used cars, but still, used cars listed at prices higher than the auction price for a nice condo in a good neighborhood with views of Lake Michigan? Wow.

Naturally owner residents are upset. Down, down, down go all the investments in real estate. That whooshing sound you hear are the broken dreams of owners hoping to sell in the next year or two flying out the windows and doors.

Do I feel bad, guilty, ashamed and otherwise embarrassed that it's likely I'll be contributing to my neighbors' plummeting decline of listing value?  Of course.

So what do I do? Do I slide a letter of apology under my neighbors' doors? Do I post a notice in the laundry room? Do I hold an open house and serve cookies and punch and let my neighbors take shots at me while I apologize?

I understand they're angry. I understand people "like me" are ruining "it" for people "like them." But this wasn't an intentional move on my part. I didn't buy a home I couldn't afford. I didn't have a stupid balloon mortgage. I didn't even have a zero down mortgage. If I hadn't been laid off everything would be fine. In fact, because I was so conservative in my purchase I've been able to hang onto it (barely) through 16 months of unemployment. And I'm fairly certain the other foreclosures in our building were the result of circumstances exactly like mine. But the end result is the same: Foreclosure, bank auction or short sales bringing the value of the other units in the building down. Way down.

So. How do I respond to the angry villagers who come at me with pitchforks and torches? "I'm sorry" is obviously inadequate. Do I take out a classified ad or billboard, a la bankruptcy notices, issuing a public blanket apology?

I just stood there listening to my neighbor vent her anger and frustration at me. Unfortunately I was wearing a frayed t-shirt, sweats and worn out slippers I threw on for the two minute round-trip trek to the mailbox. I looked very stereotypical unemployed. Of course she didn't nab me when I was going to or returning from one of my many job hunt treks or interviews. That would require the Universe to throw me a karma bone and that doesn't happen to me.

Ultimately I think it was "good" for her to take out her frustrations on me. And better me than the really mean guy who has been trying to sell his place since I moved in and is about to go into foreclosure. He would not stand there taking the verbal pitchforks and torches from my neighbor. I'm pretty sure it would get pretty ugly. So, better me than him. But what I'm wondering is: What, beyond, "I'm sorry," do I say to my neighbors about my inability to find a job that will pay my mortgage? Do I tell them I've sold everything I possibly can, including blood, to try to stay out of foreclosure? Do I tell them I'm even lying about my education and experience in order to not seem overqualified for jobs? Or do I just leave quietly under the cover of darkness, letting my silence say everything because there's really nothing to say?