06-16-2016, 02:41 PM
(06-16-2016, 02:30 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: If they are hard to prove then there is no need for them in the first place. I don't know anyone who doesn't have their own preconceived notions on who to hire. We all get better work enviornments when employers can hire who they wish and applicants get better feedback when employers c an be honest.
Rape is hard to prove as well, should we do away with that law? Anti-discrimination laws do not prevent anyone from hiring who they want to. At all. And, this isn't just about hiring, but also for continued employment. If you find out about a person's religion or sexuality after hiring them because they were th ebest for the job, is it right that you can be able to fire them for something like that?
As a hiring manager for a state agency I have so many hoops to jump through as far as how to determine who to hire and to make it as objective as possible it would probably make your head spin. But I can tell you right now that if I wanted to discriminate in my hiring process it the paperwork could be done in such a way that there would be no way to know. I could have a completely unprofessional reason for hiring someone and the paperwork would back me under scrutiny. I know, because I've seen it happen. Discrimination happens all the time and, unfortunately, people constantly get away with it. But the laws should be in place so at least those that are stupid enough to do it outright face punishment for it.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
