I didn't say that they're unique in doing this. I didn't say that it's not the norm, at least in some industries. Though I have to say I've never seen a start-up job ad from anywhere that demanded a photo.
What I AM trying to say is that 1) a photo obviously serves only the purpose of assisting with job discrimination, and 2) I would think that "young, innovative" (my words) start-ups would both not want to discriminate based on irrelevancies for ethical and legal reasons. I would also think that they'd understand that doing so is counterproductive to actually getting sh*t done.
Two anecdotes: On a recent train trip here in Germany I met a guy who was partner in a small consulting business. Very smart guy. Somehow we got on the photo-CV topic and he was astonished that they are unheard of in the States. He then recounted how in his earlier days, working for some other company, they'd placed an advertisement for an office assistant. Most of the replies were from women, and he said that all the guys in the office crowded around the stack of resumes to find the one woman who was hottest. I may be wrong, but in a male-dominated office I find it hard to believe that the "hotness factor" was not ultimately a part of the hiring decision, whether or not it was legal.
This same guy told me that his company "wasn't hiring women right now" due to the risk that a woman employee might choose to have babies. I was briefly in shock at hearing an employer state out loud that his company practiced gender-based discrimination. Obviously, with a photo CV in hand, even if a company was open to hiring women, it could use the photo to try to figure out if a candidate was of childbearing age or not, and reject their applications if so.
Nobody here or elsewhere has justified on any basis the need for a photo with a CV. It's pretty clear to me that it serves but a single purpose: employment discrimination based on appearance, gender, race, and perhaps disability. The fact that it's "common practice" is perhaps a remnant of an earlier time when discrimination based on such things was widely and openly accepted, a situation that I'd hope would have changed, especially in the generally-progressive start-up world.
What I AM trying to say is that 1) a photo obviously serves only the purpose of assisting with job discrimination, and 2) I would think that "young, innovative" (my words) start-ups would both not want to discriminate based on irrelevancies for ethical and legal reasons. I would also think that they'd understand that doing so is counterproductive to actually getting sh*t done.
Two anecdotes: On a recent train trip here in Germany I met a guy who was partner in a small consulting business. Very smart guy. Somehow we got on the photo-CV topic and he was astonished that they are unheard of in the States. He then recounted how in his earlier days, working for some other company, they'd placed an advertisement for an office assistant. Most of the replies were from women, and he said that all the guys in the office crowded around the stack of resumes to find the one woman who was hottest. I may be wrong, but in a male-dominated office I find it hard to believe that the "hotness factor" was not ultimately a part of the hiring decision, whether or not it was legal.
This same guy told me that his company "wasn't hiring women right now" due to the risk that a woman employee might choose to have babies. I was briefly in shock at hearing an employer state out loud that his company practiced gender-based discrimination. Obviously, with a photo CV in hand, even if a company was open to hiring women, it could use the photo to try to figure out if a candidate was of childbearing age or not, and reject their applications if so.
Nobody here or elsewhere has justified on any basis the need for a photo with a CV. It's pretty clear to me that it serves but a single purpose: employment discrimination based on appearance, gender, race, and perhaps disability. The fact that it's "common practice" is perhaps a remnant of an earlier time when discrimination based on such things was widely and openly accepted, a situation that I'd hope would have changed, especially in the generally-progressive start-up world.