HR becoming pickier?

[want2banrn]

So I just read a post on here where there was a vigorous debate about what the availability of new grad jobs is. What really caught my eye is a comment about HR becoming pickier. I've seen similar comments in other posts and if that is true, it makes me mad. It sounds to me like something that people do because they think it is better but really instead makes is harder for everyone.

What is the difference between someone who graduates at the top and bottom of the class? I'm sure we've all seen people whom we would not want caring for us, but is that person always at the bottom of the class in terms of grades? I just don't understand that thought process. Are patient outcomes dramatically increasing because HR thinks they got the best of the best? Is magnet status suddenly being awarded? In other words, how much does this "becoming pickier" actually matter?

[orange juice]

I know this will make many of the new grads here vomit as it almost did to me. I know of two new grads that got jobs at a local well known hospital both with terrible GPAs and failed a class and had to repeat a second year. One even failed the NCLEX the first time and job was held. These were not people who got bad grades and were still good clinically either. ITS WHO YOU KNOW THATS ALL.

[SAHMStudent]

I think the more likely, and even easier criteria with which to select a pool of applicants is ASN vs. BSN. I am not trying to start a debate here, but if HR is being "picky" and "choosy", then this is the most obvious starting point for thinning the herd. The pool of applicants HR decides to start with may be dicated by hospital policy, their mission and goals for the future of the facility or a possible bias of the HR app screener.