That jobseekers have to take the first, worst job is not a good principle. It only leads to a deterioration of all jobs when employers do not have to attract job seekers with decent working conditions and wages.
An interested employee does a better job and therefore interest should, to a certain, reasonable extent, define the job seeker's goals.
Those with a post-secondary vocational or academic degree should have even greater freedom. The idea that you have to take a crappy job while waiting for your dream job is not realistic.
First, society should respect the person who made an effort to acquire a competence above the general one. Secondly, it is a socio-economic waste to over-educate people if they end up becoming sausage bakers anyway. Thirdly, it brings great suffering and a sense of defeat to the trained person not to work or try to work at what he was trained for. Fourthly, the jobs today take so much energy that many certainly cannot bear to look for the jobs they trained for if they have to devote all their time to an unqualified but still oh-so-exhausting job.
PS
This post is about distinguishing between respecting the employee and his job. Respecting a job with too low a salary or too poor working conditions or a job below someone's qualification level can be a lack of respect for the employee. The employee is in 99,9% of cases worthy of respect (unless you are an illegal drug dealer), but the work is far from always worthy of respect. The unemployed and those on sick leave are also worthy of respect. We deserve respect because we are human.
DS