Obama To Job-Seeking Unemployed: "I Got Your Back"

[JakeStratham]

Apparently, we're going to protect another group from the tragedy of discrimination: the unemployed.

Obama Proposes Protecting Unemployed Against Hiring Bias - NYTimes.com

An excerpt:

Under the proposal, it would be “an unlawful employment practice” if a business with 15 or more employees refused to hire a person "because of the individual’s status as unemployed."

Unsuccessful job applicants could sue and recover damages for violations, just as when an employer discriminates on the basis of a person’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

Random humor break.
​

 

[mattseh]

If you want continual humor combined with spouts of depression, "Like" Obama on facebook.

 

[dreamache]

Well for one, how could they prove an employer denied their job app. because they're unemployed? I highly doubt employers will directly list that as a reason.

None the less, I can see this being a great opportunity for unemployed scum to try and sue.

 

[JakeStratham]

Well for one, how could they prove an employer denied their job app. because they're unemployed? I highly doubt employers will directly list that as a reason.

Here's one scenario (using women as an example):

State's Employment Commission: Sir, your hiring and promotion practices discriminate against women.

Employer: We don't discriminate against women.

State: Really? What percentage of your secretaries are female?

Employer: 80 percent.

State: What percentage of your senior managers are female?

Employer: 20 percent.

State: Intredasting...


Side note: this is a good way to bring down the 9%+ unemployment figure going into the 2012 contest. Obama doesn't need to pull employers into court. He just needs to frighten them about the prospect of getting sued. A single lawsuit can destroy a small employer.

That alone may be enough to get employers to hire some of the unemployed, lowering the unemployment figure in the process.

 

[Deliguy]

i won't refuse to hire the long term unemployed I'll just refuse to read the rest of their app or interview them. Who wants to put themselves at a lawsuit risk everytime you interview someone? not I!

 

[JakeStratham]

i won't refuse to hire the long term unemployed I'll just refuse to read the rest of their app or interview them. Who wants to put themselves at a lawsuit risk everytime you interview someone? not I!

State: Mr. Aloisi, we see that your company has hired 42 people in the past twelve months. What percentage had been previously unemployed at the time you hired them?

Eli: Zero.

State: Intredasting...


You see where I'm going with this.

 

[BigWill]

"Quit" Job
Apply all over the place
Circle Unemployed on Job App
????
Profit!


Like Eli said its just going to hurt jobs worse. People won't even look at most apps.

 

[cheshire]

Here's one scenario (using women as an example):

State's Employment Commission: Sir, your hiring and promotion practices discriminate against women.

Employer: We don't discriminate against women.

State: Really? What percentage of your secretaries are female?

Employer: 80 percent.

State: What percentage of your senior managers are female?

Employer: 20 percent.

State: Intredasting...

How does that work with the unemployed though?

State's Employment Commission: Sir, your hiring and promotion practices discriminate against the unemployed.

Employer: We don't discriminate against the unemployed.

State: Really? What percentage of your secretaries are unemployed?

Employer: none.

State: What percentage of your senior managers are unemployed?

Employer: none.

State: Intredasting...

 

[Vendzilla]

Times like this I remember that Barry is a Lawyer, things like this will fill up the courts

 

[JakeStratham]

How does that work with the unemployed though?

I see it working similar to the scenario in this post. It's blue-skying on my part, but that's all I have to work with.

I also imagine a lot of settlements in the future from business owners. That is, an unemployed guy gets turned away, and threatens, "I'm gonna sue!" The business owner knows he can't afford to take the chance of a major judgment, so he agrees to settle for a (possibly) lower cost. Pure shakedown. Nothing new there.

On a related note, here's how I suspect this thing is going to play in Congress. The jobs bill that includes this little nugget appears to be DOA. Others have mentioned that it was never meant to pass the House, but to use as a positioning tool in 2012. I agree.

The jobs bill will be broken into pieces. Each piece, including this employment commission BS, will either be combined with others (related or otherwise) or handled individually.

That all but guarantees nobody will be looking. It's not like the Administration posts that stuff online as had been promised. lol

I'm rambling, but there you go. Armchair politics.

 

[Insomniac]

Here is what will happen if this passes..

People will remove their employment dates off their resumes. Their resume will then say something like:

MIT
Facebook
Google
Zynga

If the interviewer asks when or how long they were employed for at the companies, they get sued for implied desire to know of unemployment status, since the applicant is qualified for the position.