Doesn’t it say that this is for initial employment?

It’s more to highlight that not having a home is not a defining characteristic of who someone is, it’s a situation that anyone could find themselves in. It’s actually trying to dismantle stereotypes by showing that it isn’t some specific group of people. It’s not just changing terminology bc homeless is an insult, it’s changing it because the way that we speak about people can have a huge impact on how those same people are viewed. Homeless drug addict has a different connotation that unhoused person struggling with addiction, yknow? No one is pretending that it has a different meaning, it’s just about being respectful towards others. We can’t dismantle stereotyping without first recognizing the terminology associated with it. Just like “Jap” and “Japanese” have much different associations with them, despite “technically” meaning the same thing (i’m asian btw, that’s why i’m using it as an example, i’m not trying to say that homeless is a slur.) Hope this helps.

A good example is applying it to other traits. If someone has a mental illness, it’s a lot better to say they have ___ rather than they ARE ___. They are dealing with not having a home, but they shouldn’t be defined by the fact that they don’t. It’s not necessary offensive to call someone homeless, it’s just more stopping and respecting that they are a multi-faceted person with more to them than just being homeless. It’s not that big of a deal either way, but it makes a difference in how people are viewed. Just like certain words you can use to describe people are technically correct, but demeaning. Language evolves, so yes, i’m sure in 5 years we might have different terms. That’s not a negative thing!

It’s used to humanize the people without homes. It’s not that deep. If anything, you sound like the one who is overly concerned about word use. It’s not about being offensive, it’s just about respect towards others.