Your Leadership Team Wants Hires Only From Elite Schools - They're Wrong...
You Think You Have Problems? Try Retention in the Missile Technology Industry...

Why Don't We Headhunt People With Crappy Commutes More Than We Do?

When it comes to hard to fill positions in tough segments and industries, why don't we headhunt people with sh**ty commutes more than we do?

We all know that a bad commute can ruin someone's work life balance.  Or, attempting to live close to where you work can be cost prohibitive. Take a look at the "apartment" below in San Francisco, then read the description from TechCrunch:

Screen Shot 2015-11-30 at 12.48.24 PM

This windowless, kitchenless, 170-square-foot apartment for $1,200

Only in SF. Check out this teeny, tiny apartment for vampires and those who don’t require sunlight ever for $1,200 per month. Note the fine accordion doors to wall yourself off when going to the bathroom.

But even this shoebox is a hot commodity in the city. Someone likely rented the 170-square-foot space already as the Craigslist ad is now gone.

Hit the link to the article above to see 10 other living spaces that are similar. It's true that San Francisco has the biggest issues of all related to affordable housing.  But other markets have their own set of issues.

Take Atlanta. Below is an embed of a recent Instagram post I posted at 10am on a normal weekday:

That's right - no less that 7-8 wrecks in my way.  I've done a good bit of research about the ATL, and recent work that I did showed the Perimeter area (intersection of 285 and 400, top of 285 loop) as being the spot in the ATL that the highest percentage of metro residents consider a "reasonable commute".  At least until they run into the traffic I did on the day in question above.

All of this begs the question for really tough spots in metros areas with harsh traffic - why wouldn't we go the extra mile as recruiters and out of 5-10 candidates that look to have to ability to do the job, research where they currently live and work?  Once that work is done, the smart target becomes someone you can offer up a reduction of 30 minutes of one-way commute time - effectively giving them back an hour each day to live their lives.

Does it mean you still won't have to pay?  Absolutely not, but you're already going to have to pay to rip someone away from their current job in a competitive industry. 

Always be closing.

Comments

Rabadniertokentorer Marashiona

Yeah, it's no better in England. London has been transformed by austerity and our appalling housing crisis. It's an unlivable wasteland. That San Fran flat is a steal compared to what's going on in London.

I think the bigger focus now is turning remote working into a consistent thing. Why some businesses insist on an employee being in the office (when they blatantly don't need to be) is beyond me.

Previously, I've done four hours a day of public transport for minimum wage (skilled) jobs that I could easily have done from home. And I would have done them better, too. Or, frankly, businesses should have to pay employees for the commute. That would make businesses change their attitude.

Bottom line is capitalism is broken. It supports a select few who get rich and love it whilst everyone else suffers horribly.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)