Ever since SHRM started pushing the benefits of allowing Employ Media to launch http://diversity.jobs, I feel differently about the .jobs expansion initiative. Why would SHRM pick on my small company? Over the years, my company has advertised in SHRM’s magazines, on its website and exhibited at its conferences. So, why would SHRM want to throw my company under the bus?
Our flagship websites are LatPro.com (for Hispanic and bilingual jobs) and DiversityJobs.com. Apparently SHRM thinks it can do better and is promoting the idea that HR could benefit from new websites at diversity.jobs, bilingual.jobs and SpanishSpeaking.jobs.
So, I was very glad to hear from Peter Weddle today at the IAEWS about the association’s new efforts and a related task force to campaign against the expansion. He makes a credible argument that ICANN may open a can of worms for itself by approving the expansion.
Can ICANN be persuaded not to step on the landmine? If you think .jobs may pose a competitive threat to your job board, the .jobs task force has put together a significant collection of materials you may wish to review. So, have a look and decide for yourself if it’s worth a few minutes of your time to make your opinions known to ICANN. Send an e-mail to Peter Weddle at director at employmentwebsites dot org for information, but do it today because time is running out (the deadline is Friday). Even faster than contacting Peter, you can use the e-mail template found here on Steven Rothberg’s blog post.
Getting back to SHRM, I did go to the trouble of writing to the leadership to ask why SHRM would pick on my small company. Did you know that SHRM recently sent a survey to a select group of its members to solicit feedback on the proposed expansion of the .jobs service? Of the five examples of dictionary words provided, three of them target my company’s sites. None of the examples fell within SHRM’s own area of expertise, namely human resources. Why didn’t SHRM discuss the possible benefits of HR.jobs and recruiting.jobs instead?
No one at SHRM responded.
Now my question is, if there really is so much value for employers and HR practitioners in a free/paid premium system, why hasn’t SHRM offered free job posting on its own site to all employers? And why does SHRM outsource the operation of it’s own job site if providing value to employers is really the issue here?
This is what I see. The business of job search and job boards is just financial engineering for SHRM — .jobs is a revenue source for SHRM just like the SHRM job board is a revenue source. The reason that SHRM wants HR practitioners to think about diversity and Spanish speakers is that SHRM has something to hide. It’s this — SHRM is really throwing job boards AND employers under the bus. The only long-run beneficiaries will be the principals, SHRM and Employ Media.
First job boards get trampled, then employers are hung out to dry at the very end. So when you think about diversity.jobs and bilingual.jobs, remember what they say in marketing “if you don’t have anything to say, sing it!”. SHRM and Employ Media are leading employers and job boards off a cliff while singing a lullaby.
Will ICANN allow it? That may depend on job board industry leaders like you.