thereisnospoon
Gold Member
- Apr 11, 2010
- 29,821
- 3,030
I think being unemployed should not and probably is not a deciding criteria for denial of employment. However, if a candidate for a job shows multiple time periods of unemployment, the hiring company should be within it's sole discretion to deny a job to a person who falls outside the criteria.CaféAuLait;4201645 said:Obama Jobs Bill proposes letting the jobless sue for discrimination
Advocates for the unemployed have cheered a push by the Obama administration to ban discrimination against the jobless. But business groups and their allies are calling the effort unnecessary and counterproductive.
The job creation bill that President Obama sent to Congress earlier this month includes a provision that would allow unsuccessful job applicants to sue if they think a company of 15 more employees denied them a job because they were unemployed.
The provision would ban employment ads that explicitly declare the unemployed ineligible, with phrases like "Jobless need not apply." As The Lookout has reported, such ads appear to have proliferated in recent years, prompting an inquiry by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Democratic lawmakers in both the House and the Senate have introduced similar measures. Obama said recently that discrimination against the unemployed makes "absolutely no sense," especially because many people find themselves out of work through no fault of their own.
Obama proposes letting the jobless sue for discrimination | The Lookout - Yahoo! News
I guess Obama's jobs bill will keep the lawyers employed and rich.
This is another example of Obama's disdain for the Constitution and the rule of law.
That rule states that it is up to the plaintiff to prove his case. No the the defendant's job to prove he is innocent.
Obama's proposal seeks to do just that. It would open a Pandora's box of frivolous time and money consuming suits that will in the end be denied. IN the mean time companies will end up spending billions defending these idiotic suits. No one should think for a second those costs will not be passed along to the consumer.