Being laid off is tough - you start to question your own self worth. As such, I think the stigma we attach to it is a self-imposed stigma.

In the end, whether being laid off knocks you down or makes you stronger is up to you. It is difficult, but it's also an opportunity to build a new life and to follow your passions that were pushed aside by your work.
Permalink | Report

Yes, you will be considered bad luck. It is better to leave before you get laid off (all advantages being equal). However, with the amount of unemployment that we are facing, I don't think that the stigma will be as strong as it is when the economy is booming.
Permalink | Report

Depends, it's easiest just to explain to a potential new employer or a friend that the company was going through hard times and then throw in an obligatory "You know, with this economy" and then sigh.

Just the term "laid off" lightens the load. People think being laid off means mandatory lay-offs and not firings. When you are laid off for declining performance, companies often have no qualms telling you that "you're being let go", which is very different from being laid off.

But ask your wife if there is a stigma attached to being laid off. She's the only one who'll stigmatize it. She'll probably just leave you. Because you won't find another job in this economy.
Permalink | Report

I would have to say that this could definitely be a double edged sword the way you have described it. I understand your concern with the terminology; although, I think that after the .Com bubble and burst the idea of layoffs have become more commonplace than they were "in the old times" when people would work for the same place for forty or fifty years and retire.

Typically when I'm reviewing a resume of a potential employee, I don't focus so much on the "why you left this job" and focus more on what the person has to say about it. The reason for this is you can get real insight into who the person is by the way they respond to the inquiry.

As for preference of "laid off" vs. "available for hire," I'm sure that's a personal thing for each person, but I do prefer to say/hear "laid off due to cutbacks in my department" as opposed to "available for hire." It's obvious that either one is true otherwise you wouldn't be applying for the job, right? :)

Always good to be up front and clear in the situation. "available for hire" seems more like you are trying to hide the reason you are no longer employed as opposed to polishing it up.
Permalink | Report

Several friends and I are in the homebuilding industry and have been in or weathered numerous layoffs. For us, it is not a stigma, because everyone -- even potential employers outside the industry -- understands this. In some cases, if you aren't part of the upper management "good ol' boys club", you are going to be laid off. However, if there are no economic circumstances surrounding a lay off, I think it definitely makes those getting let go look like dead wood.
Permalink | Report

Depending on the situation I could say no, there is no stigmata. But I will be kidding myself. The simple fact that you were laid off creates deep in you the question of "why me?" and the answer to this it could prove more confusing.
Nowadays most recriuters and HR departments are aware of the multiple laid offs that this country has had in the last decade. This means that a new mentality, as how to managed an appicant that has been laid off, hs been created. This new approach is more forgiving about being laid off.
When it comes to personal issues, it is about how strong the person that was laid off will react to that fact, and how it will affect the managing of it.
Permalink | Report

Not any more. but you were not "Layed off" You were "RIF"ed

one single person can be layed off ( fired ). If it was a RIF it is no reflection on you personally. I have been RIFed at least a dozen times and it has never been questioned in an interview.
Permalink | Report