taxpreparer said:

---

CNBC tweet is incorrect. They are not being overlooked, they are being ignored.

---

Not even ignored. Flat out rejected is more accurate.

David Happymountain said:

---

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Putting he/him/his or she/her/hers in your bio may be justified for people with gender-misleading first names, like a woman named Billie, or a man named Leslie.

But if I were in such a situation, I'd probably go with the more subtle approach of writing "Mr." or "Ms.", just to avoid the implication of being a transgender activist.

---

good point.

---

RIP Sunrise Mall...

Old May Banker said:

---

Your comment leads me to believe you have hired exactly zero people if you believe that's how it works.

---

Well you'd be wrong so there's that.

Not that I don't have "being wrong" in me... but I doubt I am this time.

Old May Banker said:

---

Not that I don't have "being wrong" in me... but I doubt I am this time.

---

Well I'm certainly not going to out my employer on this board. But go ahead and believe what you want to.

My pronouns are Effort / EBITDA!

How do non-binary ninja's defeat their enemies?

They slash them.

nai06 said:

---

Old May Banker said:

---

Not that I don't have "being wrong" in me... but I doubt I am this time.

---

Well I'm certainly not going to out my employer on this board. But go ahead and believe what you want to.

---

I could have sworn you were a teacher.

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

Putting he/him/his or she/her/hers in your bio may be justified for people with gender-misleading first names, like a woman named Billie, or a man named Leslie.

But if I were in such a situation, I'd probably go with the more subtle approach of writing "Mr." or "Ms.", just to avoid the implication of being a transgender activist.

---

Worked for The Waltons

Quote:

---

So on what basis would this be illegal?

---

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Pronouns listed on a resume are an indicator of sex or gender and if that is the basis of the rejection, it could be construed as discrimination on the basis of sex or gender under Title VII.

That being said, there are responsibilities on both side of the resume:

• It is the potential employer's responsibility not to discriminate; and
• it is the applicant's responsibility to limit the disclosure of any information that could result in discrimination.

This is one of the reasons many employers, including the federal government, tell applicants up-front that any application or resume that includes a photo of the applicant will be disqualified from consideration.

Quote:

---

And is not wanting someone with mental illness or lack of intelligence such a bad thing? Are "they" a protected class all of a sudden?

---

If you regard an applicant as having "mental illness," then you are regarding them as having a disability. The Americans with Disabilities Act then applies to that applicant whether or not they have an actual disability. If you choose not to hire them on that basis, you may be guilty of discrimination on the basis of disability.

There are v few serious business ppl who aren't trying to monetize wokeism embracing wokeism.

Quote:

---

if that is the basis of the rejection, it could be construed as discrimination on the basis of sex or gender under Title VII.

---

No decent business person would ever use that as a reason... even if it is.

JamesPShelley said:

---

"I found someone more qualified to fill the position. Thank you for applying. Best wishes on your pursuits".

Easy. Gravy. No liability.

---

This is the way, as long as the person you hire is, in fact, more qualified..

Ryan the Temp said:

---

JamesPShelley said:

---

"I found someone more qualified to fill the position. Thank you for applying. Best wishes on your pursuits".

Easy. Gravy. No liability.

---

This is the way, as long as the person you hire is, in fact, more qualified..

---

You highlight a couple areas that are different from the hire and say, "this gave me pause... another canidate was better qualified"

It ain't rocket surgery.

captkirk said:

---

Ryan the Temp said:

---

JamesPShelley said:

---

"I found someone more qualified to fill the position. Thank you for applying. Best wishes on your pursuits".

Easy. Gravy. No liability.

---

This is the way, as long as the person you hire is, in fact, more qualified.

---

"Qualifications" are subjective. There is always someone more qualified

---

Often, but not always. Good thing is, rejected applicants typically never know if it's a true statement and I'm not aware of any employment lawyer anywhere who will take a discrimination case on contingency.

Ryan the Temp said:

---

Quote:

---

So on what basis would this be illegal?

---

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Pronouns listed on a resume are an indicator of sex or gender and if that is the basis of the rejection, it could be construed as discrimination on the basis of sex or gender under Title VII.

That being said, there are responsibilities on both side of the resume:

• It is the potential employer's responsibility not to discriminate; and
• it is the applicant's responsibility to limit the disclosure of any information that could result in discrimination.

This is one of the reasons many employers, including the federal government, tell applicants up-front that any application or resume that includes a photo of the applicant will be disqualified from consideration.

---

This is why they are being passed up. I'm sure you spend a lot of time at work reminding everybody.

Quote:

---

You highlight a couple areas that are different from the hire and say, "this gave me pause... another canidate was better qualified"

---

In most instances, you don't owe the applicant an explanation. "Thanks for your interest in the position. We've decided to go with someone else."

Offering explanations only creates additional points of scrutiny.

Quote:

---

This is why they are being passed up. I'm sure you spend a lot of time at work reminding everybody.

---

My clients are not typically applicants, but when I do provide advice to applicants I always tell them to never include a photo and to strongly consider omitting any information that could be used to discriminate against them that is not absolutely necessary and relevant to the job.

Ryan the Temp said:

---

Quote:

---

And is not wanting someone with mental illness or lack of intelligence such a bad thing? Are "they" a protected class all of a sudden?

---

If you regard an applicant as having "mental illness," then you are regarding them as having a disability. The Americans with Disabilities Act then applies to that applicant whether or not they have an actual disability. If you choose not to hire them on that basis, you may be guilty of discrimination on the basis of disability.

---

See the first half of my post.

I did. I figured this information was worth sharing for the benefit of those who might not have known.

Ryan the Temp said:

---

JamesPShelley said:

---

"I found someone more qualified to fill the position. Thank you for applying. Best wishes on your pursuits".

Easy. Gravy. No liability.

---

This is the way, as long as the person you hire is, in fact, more qualified..

---

Umm…technically, if someone is mentally broken enough to think it's a good idea to put pronouns on a resume for employment, than yes, "they" are absolutely literally less qualified to work for me in any capacity.

Ryan the Temp said:

---

Quote:

---

You highlight a couple areas that are different from the hire and say, "this gave me pause... another canidate was better qualified"

---

In most instances, you don't owe the applicant an explanation. "Thanks for your interest in the position. We've decided to go with someone else."

Offering explanations only creates additional points of scrutiny.

---

Exactly. If a boss is stupid enough to tell applicants that this is why they aren't hired, then they shouldn't be in charge of that responsibility anyway.

Ryan the Temp said:

---

Quote:

---

This is why they are being passed up. I'm sure you spend a lot of time at work reminding everybody.

---

My clients are not typically applicants, but when I do provide advice to applicants I always tell them to never include a photo and to strongly consider omitting any information that could be used to discriminate against them that is not absolutely necessary and relevant to the job.

---

Also make sure they scrub public social media. I'm sure that's obvious. It is a good filter tool that has been used to weed out all walks of life based on looks. I've made the difficult unquantifiable "looks a little lazy and not a go getter" judgments or a simple "too attractive."

Ryan the Temp said:

---

Quote:

---

You highlight a couple areas that are different from the hire and say, "this gave me pause... another canidate was better qualified"

---

In most instances, you don't owe the applicant an explanation. "Thanks for your interest in the position. We've decided to go with someone else."

Offering explanations only creates additional points of scrutiny.

---

Is there a law that requires that you respond back to all applicants?

If not, don't even respond.

Ryan the Temp said:

---

Quote:

---

You highlight a couple areas that are different from the hire and say, "this gave me pause... another canidate was better qualified"

---

In most instances, you don't owe the applicant an explanation. "Thanks for your interest in the position. We've decided to go with someone else."

Offering explanations only creates additional points of scrutiny.

---

I know that very well and stated it poorly. I merely meant as a way of speaking to oneself or highlighting in one's mind.

WoMD said:

---

Ryan the Temp said:

---

JamesPShelley said:

---

"I found someone more qualified to fill the position. Thank you for applying. Best wishes on your pursuits".

Easy. Gravy. No liability.

---

This is the way, as long as the person you hire is, in fact, more qualified..

---

Umm…technically, if someone is mentally broken enough to think it's a good idea to put pronouns on a resume for employment, than yes, "they" are absolutely literally less qualified to work for me in any capacity.

---

In that case, you'll have to establish the details of a bona fide occupational qualification that will withstand the scrutiny of the EEOC (hint: it won't). You would also have to prove how the act of placing pronouns on a resume constitutes a mental disability and how it would prevent the person from performing the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation (hint: you can't).

Your previous comment is exactly the advice I give most often - Don't tell an applicant why you aren't hiring them. I also go one further and tell them if they are going to use any reasoning that could be construed as creating a means or method of discrimination not to tell ANYONE about it, not even coworkers.

My favorite recommendations for reasons to exclude an applicant are typos on their application, unexplained gaps in employment history, and failure to list a reason for leaving a previous job.

BCG Disciple said:

---

Ryan the Temp said:

---

Quote:

---

This is why they are being passed up. I'm sure you spend a lot of time at work reminding everybody.

---

My clients are not typically applicants, but when I do provide advice to applicants I always tell them to never include a photo and to strongly consider omitting any information that could be used to discriminate against them that is not absolutely necessary and relevant to the job.

---

Also make sure they scrub public social media. I'm sure that's obvious. It is a good filter tool that has been used to weed out all walks of life based on looks. I've made the difficult unquantifiable "looks a little lazy and not a go getter" judgments or a simple "too attractive."

---

I've excluded lots of applicants for their social media presence. It's a really great tool, but don't ever tell anyone you looked at an applicant's social media because it creates potential points of discrimination as soon as you know what they look like, where they live, and all sorts of other aspects of their lives that show up on social media.

So much of what I do as a consultant is telling people how not to get caught discriminating to minimize their risk.

ETA: To applicants - Lock your social media down when job hunting.

This thread keeps on delivering.

Cobra39