Recruiting an unemployed candidate - free our recruiting team from unconscious biases?

Few days back, one of my clients had asked me NOT to share the cv’s of the candidates who are on sabbatical or being laid off or unemployed or with a career gap. I was taken aback since was unable to understand the thought process behind this decision. How could an ‘unemployed’ status tag a candidate as a non-hire material?
I believe that performance, capability and talent have nothing to do with someone currently out of work. Reasons of career gap could be anything but in no possible circumstances it lessens an individual skills and talent. What is candidate’s fault if his process gets ramped down or if his company decides to lay off- candidate’s performance has nothing to do with such decisions. Even I am on a short sabbatical, does this make me inferior or short of talent? Why this mindset? Also, even if Organizations consider the non working candidates they offer them no hike or a minimal hike which is absolutely un-fair.
My question to all the HR Leaders- can’t we bring the change & be the change? Can’t we free our recruiting team from unconscious biases? Can’t we deliberate and find out solutions to remove such dogmas which can be a cloud on the horizon for our future generation? Can’t we give them a fair chance?
Over to you Guys!!

These mindsets exist because there is no shortage of candidates seeking employment. Changing mindsets is a challenging process that takes time.

This change would take time to be accepted by recruiters/companies. This is one of the major factors that demotivates a candidate who wants to start working after a break (for whatever reason).

Perhaps, the client may be having a feeling that those on the bench are second best, so why bother when fresh and super good candidates are available. As rightly said above, the problem is that of plenty being available. So there has to be some screening out candidates at the threshold itself, just to limit the numbers. Most organizations have some such criteria, like those who have earlier applied need not apply again. Such biases and prejudices are prevalent in the industry.

Dear HR colleague,

I wish I agreed with you more. What should matter for a recruiter is the talent and capability relevant to the role possessed by the candidate, and it should be the only factor for elimination/selection. Any other considerations should not be allowed to influence our decisions in the selection process.

Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant

Dear Pammy,

I understand your concern and issues over the matter. Your concern will be justified when you shall remain the employer and you have the choice to follow. But in this matter, the choice and option of the client to be abided since you are working on their behalf; everyone has got a choice and a policy.

A practical example is cited below to understand the situation: two years ago, my brother's candidacy was cancelled after being selected for the position of GM on policy grounds. The reason stated was that the establishment was owned by his employer 10 years back, which was later sold.

Thank you.