There is a lot of discussion on LinkedIn over discrimination of older workers, of female workers etc. That led me to think. If I own a company, I want to get the "right" kind of employee that works for me. Let's say I might want someone who is 30-35, young but not so young. I might want to hire a white male who is over 6 feet tall and slim (no fatties) because I want to project a healthy image. I might want to hire someone with no tats. Maybe my customers are religious folks so no LGBTQASDFGH.

The list goes on. It is a free market, I should be able to hire whomever I want. The converse of this is also that I would be discriminating against some others who do not fit into my criteria.

So how should we reconcile these two competing goals?

If I want to hire a black woman (as my customers are black let's say), why should I be forced to hire latinos?
If I want to hire women who are not pregnant, why should I be forced to hire someone who is pregnant and have her take off for months leaving me in a lurch?

So what kinds of discrimination is okay? All kinds? None?

Hope you aren't the judge on this lawsuit

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14025427/brandy-livingston-sues-hooters-rejected-job-appearance.html

We interview everyone and just pick the ones we want. No discrimination on interviews but after hiring a few people that just wanted to talk about social issues and not about getting the job done they are tasked we avoid hiring them. It's not discrimination if you at least interview them.

What do you think this is? A free country?

None, if anyone should want the job, you have to hire them. Also you can't discriminate against people who have not actually applied for the job.

Just start sending paychecks.

I think ANY kind of discrimination in hiring should be legal other than racial discrimination.

If you have a warehouse you should not be forced to hire a wheelchair bound warehouse manager.

If you own an airline, you shouldn't be forced to hire old overweight women.

Etc Etc....

Freedom of association.

Any and all kinds of discrimination should be legal. It's your business, you should be able to hire (and fire) whoever you want for any reason at any wage. Unfortunately government has felt the need to interfere in this arena.

Whether it's morally right or not is a different matter.

He who keeps his mouth shut can discriminate all he wants.

No Spin Ag said:

---

None.

EOT

---

White males are fair game

CDUB98 said:

---

White people need not apply.*


*Unless you're gay.

---

They don't ask if you are gay on the applications. Even gay white males know they are f'd.

You are not discriminating against anyone if you choose the person you feel is the best fit for the job. If the person is white, fine, if the person is some other color, fine.

I refused to hire anyone who had visible tats or excessive piercings (imo) for my bookkeping and tax practice. I also freely admit, I probably lost out on a few great employees because of this. It was still my business, and I decided how I was visibly represented.

No Spin Ag said:

---

None.

EOT

---

All.

EOT


Well, that was easy.


Serious answer, hire who you want for whatever reason you want. If you decide you want to reject 10% of your applicants because they're left-handed, that's your loss, and you're an idiot.

I can pick what business I want to support, and which I don't. We stopped going to a restaurant we liked about 40 years ago, because a trusted friend told us his black son-in-law was mistreated. They soon went out of business, though we don't really know why.

But no government had to force them to be good people, nor did the government force us to eat there.

In today's Social Media world, businesses are cancelled and attacke all the time, often on flimsy pretexts. Does anyone really believe a business could discriminate today and not be called out?

How do you prove in a court of law that you did not hire someone based on discrimination?

"The candidate was not a good fit."

What makes the candidate not a good fit?

"Because I say so."

"Because I am the owner"

"Because I sign the checks"

"Because I pay the bills"

taxpreparer said:

---

It was still my business, and I decided how I was visibly represented.

---

Exactly how does Hooters get to hire only young, attractive girls? (At least so far)

Amen

Sublette County said:

---

Any and all kinds of discrimination should be legal. It's your business, you should be able to hire (and fire) whoever you want for any reason at any wage. Unfortunately government has felt the need to interfere in this arena.

Whether it's morally right or not is a different matter.

---

Quote:

---

Applicants, employees and former employees are protected from employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, or gender identity), national origin, age (40 or older), disability and genetic information (including family medical history).

---

https://www.eeoc.gov/employers/small-business/3-who-protected-employment-discrimination

Discriminating against applicants that use pronouns on their resume is definitely ok.

But that's the government mandating. The government should stay out of it. If a private business wants to discriminate they should be allowed

Companies should really not even be allowed to ask your race, gender, or other labels given they aren't legally allowed to discriminate based on that.

backintexas2013 said:

---

But that's the government mandating. The government should stay out of it. If a private business wants to discriminate they should be allowed

---

Companies discriminate, they just don't talk about it or make it known.

No big cans…no hire.

Intelligent vs Idiot

I was just providing the info about what was prohibited. As far as what SHOULD be prohibited, that's a different discussion.

I've been recruiting since 1998 and the constant is candidates over 60 are passed over much more frequently than any other group.

I have been asked to interview more blacks, Hispanic and women candidates recently.

ABATTBQ87 said:

---

I've been recruiting since 1998 and the constant is candidates over 60 are passed over much more frequently than any other group.

I have been asked to interview more blacks, Hispanic and women candidates recently.

---

In other words, you are told to discriminate against white males.

ABATTBQ87 said:

---

I've been recruiting since 1998 and the constant is candidates over 60 are passed over much more frequently than any other group.

I have been asked to interview more blacks, Hispanic and women candidates recently.

---

I think another way to look at it is by 60, one should have saved up enough money that they wouldn't need to work anymore. That is how I look at it. I don't want to be working at 60. I am not sure I want to work in this toxic US corporate culture right now.

60+ are attractive hires only for exec roles. For anything below that, companies discriminate.

Easy

Have them answer the following question:

1. What is a woman?

Then depending on the answer. You can say you do n't hire ignorant people or liars, and they didn't pass the aptitude test.

HowdyTexasAggies said:

---

ABATTBQ87 said:

---

I've been recruiting since 1998 and the constant is candidates over 60 are passed over much more frequently than any other group.

I have been asked to interview more blacks, Hispanic and women candidates recently.

---

In other words, you are told to discriminate against white males.

---

Maybe