(07-15-2016 09:26 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-12-2016 03:27 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  Diversity occurs whether we like it or not.

When hiring, can you tell:

1) if someone is straight or gay?
2) if someone is conservative or liberal?
3) which church they attend if they attend or belong at all?
4) how someone feels about controversial subjects such as abortion?
5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?
6) etc.

Diversity at the point of hiring takes into account only those things that we can readily see such as sex, race, and the like.

However, diversity at the point of promotion does take into account those things that we cannot ascertain during the interview process since we tend to be able to observe those things over time. Towards that end, there are plenty of institutions such as academia where true diversity (i.e., the things we cannot see) is squashed in the name of liberalism. Likewise, there are plenty of institutions where the opposite happens.

I planned on approaching numbers 1-6 above one-by-one, but due to lack of time, I'll do a quick hit on the easy one - number five:

5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?

For my current job, other than a few minutes of chat with the Director of Personnel's underlings at a truly massive job fair, I had one one-hour interview with the head honcho of personnel. That was it.

On the floor behind Mr. Head Honcho of Personnel were three stacks of resumes. One stack was about a foot high, which were the resumes of people who were not being considered. The second stack was maybe an inch and a half high, which were resumes of people he was considering. The third stack was maybe a quarter inch - people he was prepared to hire.

During the hour-long "interview," I was struck by how little we actually discussed my qualifications, the job and how I'd fit into it. We chatted about that stack of resumes. We chatted about how young people don't know how to dress for jobs. We chatted about how the organization probably would not pay for another degree because I already had three (that may very well turn out to be false - look out for degree #4!). We chatted about how he directed his underlings to select candidates at the job fair whose personalities they thought would fit in with the rest of the organization.

That was only the first half hour.

The second half hour, we talked about football. More specifically, we talked about UC football. A half an hour about football. He brought it up, not me. The only thing that stopped that discussion was that he wanted to go to lunch.

Before it ended, he told me that my future involved working for his organization.

I don't interview much anymore, but my experience is that it's not just about qualifications, it's how you'll fit in - your personality - your ability to get along with others. A lot of it is simply how much they like you.

Off the top of my head, I've been asked "different" questions over the years: What's your favorite kind of food? How did you manage to not be married? What are your hobbies? Do you watch UC football?

There's nothing illegal about asking if you like or hate basketball. More often than not, interviews end up being informal chats about whatever - things that have nothing to do with the job. I don't think it would be all that unusual to talk sports during an interview.

You know, those informal chats bring out a lot in a person. It's a great way to delve into personal lives, maybe get a glimpse of different views, family life, etc.

Your experience matches mine. We hire a bunch of technical people, but when they talk to me, I don't grill them on tech stuff. They have already passed a tech interview with one of my managers.

When I interview people, I tend to have a conversation. I am curious about where their interests lie when they are not working. What are their goals -- career or otherwise. I want to see how they interact with executives. I want to see if they have a sense of humor.

I give candidates plenty of time to ask me questions. The questions that someone asks reveals quite a bit - their thought processes, things that they value (e.g., growth and expansion of a company), how dedicated they might be, etc.

One thing that always surprises me, but it shouldn't, is how many people are afraid to talk with presidents and CEO's. It is almost like they think that we don't have families, go to see ball games, and all of the other stuff that everybody does.

(07-15-2016 10:39 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 09:26 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-12-2016 03:27 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  Diversity occurs whether we like it or not.

When hiring, can you tell:

1) if someone is straight or gay?
2) if someone is conservative or liberal?
3) which church they attend if they attend or belong at all?
4) how someone feels about controversial subjects such as abortion?
5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?
6) etc.

Diversity at the point of hiring takes into account only those things that we can readily see such as sex, race, and the like.

However, diversity at the point of promotion does take into account those things that we cannot ascertain during the interview process since we tend to be able to observe those things over time. Towards that end, there are plenty of institutions such as academia where true diversity (i.e., the things we cannot see) is squashed in the name of liberalism. Likewise, there are plenty of institutions where the opposite happens.

I planned on approaching numbers 1-6 above one-by-one, but due to lack of time, I'll do a quick hit on the easy one - number five:

5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?

For my current job, other than a few minutes of chat with the Director of Personnel's underlings at a truly massive job fair, I had one one-hour interview with the head honcho of personnel. That was it.

On the floor behind Mr. Head Honcho of Personnel were three stacks of resumes. One stack was about a foot high, which were the resumes of people who were not being considered. The second stack was maybe an inch and a half high, which were resumes of people he was considering. The third stack was maybe a quarter inch - people he was prepared to hire.

During the hour-long "interview," I was struck by how little we actually discussed my qualifications, the job and how I'd fit into it. We chatted about that stack of resumes. We chatted about how young people don't know how to dress for jobs. We chatted about how the organization probably would not pay for another degree because I already had three (that may very well turn out to be false - look out for degree #4!). We chatted about how he directed his underlings to select candidates at the job fair whose personalities they thought would fit in with the rest of the organization.

That was only the first half hour.

The second half hour, we talked about football. More specifically, we talked about UC football. A half an hour about football. He brought it up, not me. The only thing that stopped that discussion was that he wanted to go to lunch.

Before it ended, he told me that my future involved working for his organization.

I don't interview much anymore, but my experience is that it's not just about qualifications, it's how you'll fit in - your personality - your ability to get along with others. A lot of it is simply how much they like you.

Off the top of my head, I've been asked "different" questions over the years: What's your favorite kind of food? How did you manage to not be married? What are your hobbies? Do you watch UC football?

There's nothing illegal about asking if you like or hate basketball. More often than not, interviews end up being informal chats about whatever - things that have nothing to do with the job. I don't think it would be all that unusual to talk sports during an interview.

You know, those informal chats bring out a lot in a person. It's a great way to delve into personal lives, maybe get a glimpse of different views, family life, etc.

Your experience matches mine. We hire a bunch of technical people, but when they talk to me, I don't grill them on tech stuff. They have already passed a tech interview with one of my managers.

When I interview people, I tend to have a conversation. I am curious about where their interests lie when they are not working. What are their goals -- career or otherwise. I want to see how they interact with executives. I want to see if they have a sense of humor.

I give candidates plenty of time to ask me questions. The questions that someone asks reveals quite a bit - their thought processes, things that they value (e.g., growth and expansion of a company), how dedicated they might be, etc.

One thing that always surprises me, but it shouldn't, is how many people are afraid to talk with presidents and CEO's. It is almost like they think that we don't have families, go to see ball games, and all of the other stuff that everybody does.

How many times have you been asked about vacation packages in your interviews? I have been asked that many times. I completely tone out when that question is broached early in the interview process.

Sought candidates, interviewed thousands of candidates and been involved in hundreds of hires (not an exaggeration).

Gender of hires has been slightly tilted male but still very close to 50/50. Although I suppose it is arrogant of me to assign them their gender status. LOL.

"Diversity hires" have averaged 15-18%-. Very consistent year to year - In nearly 20 years of work I don't think I have ever had a year under 10%

I never try to hire specifically for "diversity" - I never try not to hire for diversity.

These are high paying sales and sales management jobs (100-300K or more). 100% of the candidates have college degrees.

A non-white candidate emerges as the best talent level and "fit" candidate 15-18% of the time and is hired. Simple as that.

That non-white hired candidate is black roughly 75% of the time. For whatever reason, extremely few asians and hispanics (although that is increasing) apply and when I seek candidates I find very asians and hispanics that fit the window I am looking for. And again I could give a sh*t about gender, race or ethnicity - if they are good I want them.

My job is to find a person that is most likely to succeed at a high level, most likely to adapt and embrace the company culture and most likely to stick with the company to further their career.

If I were forced to start a program to hire "diversity"- I would find another company to work for. It is a fundamentally racist concept and practice that I won't be involved with. No matter how well intended the rationalizations are - two wrongs don't a right.

And I have a career of proof that even at the level of very highly desirable, high paying jobs, it isn't even necessary.

(07-15-2016 10:58 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 10:39 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 09:26 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-12-2016 03:27 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  Diversity occurs whether we like it or not.

When hiring, can you tell:

1) if someone is straight or gay?
2) if someone is conservative or liberal?
3) which church they attend if they attend or belong at all?
4) how someone feels about controversial subjects such as abortion?
5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?
6) etc.

Diversity at the point of hiring takes into account only those things that we can readily see such as sex, race, and the like.

However, diversity at the point of promotion does take into account those things that we cannot ascertain during the interview process since we tend to be able to observe those things over time. Towards that end, there are plenty of institutions such as academia where true diversity (i.e., the things we cannot see) is squashed in the name of liberalism. Likewise, there are plenty of institutions where the opposite happens.

I planned on approaching numbers 1-6 above one-by-one, but due to lack of time, I'll do a quick hit on the easy one - number five:

5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?

For my current job, other than a few minutes of chat with the Director of Personnel's underlings at a truly massive job fair, I had one one-hour interview with the head honcho of personnel. That was it.

On the floor behind Mr. Head Honcho of Personnel were three stacks of resumes. One stack was about a foot high, which were the resumes of people who were not being considered. The second stack was maybe an inch and a half high, which were resumes of people he was considering. The third stack was maybe a quarter inch - people he was prepared to hire.

During the hour-long "interview," I was struck by how little we actually discussed my qualifications, the job and how I'd fit into it. We chatted about that stack of resumes. We chatted about how young people don't know how to dress for jobs. We chatted about how the organization probably would not pay for another degree because I already had three (that may very well turn out to be false - look out for degree #4!). We chatted about how he directed his underlings to select candidates at the job fair whose personalities they thought would fit in with the rest of the organization.

That was only the first half hour.

The second half hour, we talked about football. More specifically, we talked about UC football. A half an hour about football. He brought it up, not me. The only thing that stopped that discussion was that he wanted to go to lunch.

Before it ended, he told me that my future involved working for his organization.

I don't interview much anymore, but my experience is that it's not just about qualifications, it's how you'll fit in - your personality - your ability to get along with others. A lot of it is simply how much they like you.

Off the top of my head, I've been asked "different" questions over the years: What's your favorite kind of food? How did you manage to not be married? What are your hobbies? Do you watch UC football?

There's nothing illegal about asking if you like or hate basketball. More often than not, interviews end up being informal chats about whatever - things that have nothing to do with the job. I don't think it would be all that unusual to talk sports during an interview.

You know, those informal chats bring out a lot in a person. It's a great way to delve into personal lives, maybe get a glimpse of different views, family life, etc.

Your experience matches mine. We hire a bunch of technical people, but when they talk to me, I don't grill them on tech stuff. They have already passed a tech interview with one of my managers.

When I interview people, I tend to have a conversation. I am curious about where their interests lie when they are not working. What are their goals -- career or otherwise. I want to see how they interact with executives. I want to see if they have a sense of humor.

I give candidates plenty of time to ask me questions. The questions that someone asks reveals quite a bit - their thought processes, things that they value (e.g., growth and expansion of a company), how dedicated they might be, etc.

One thing that always surprises me, but it shouldn't, is how many people are afraid to talk with presidents and CEO's. It is almost like they think that we don't have families, go to see ball games, and all of the other stuff that everybody does.

How many times have you been asked about vacation packages in your interviews? I have been asked that many times. I completely tone out when that question is broached early in the interview process.

If a non-engineer asks about those things early on, it is not a good sign.

I try to take into account that many of the best engineers aren't what you would call "worldly" and, at times, they will act in a naïve fashion. It just comes with the territory.

White Boy Privilage

And this is what we get with the Diversity SJW's. Young white males who feel the need to apologize for what they are.

What other demographic in our country are being told that they need to apologize for what they are, regardless of who they are as a person?

I feel sorry for this poor kid. He is being taught to self hate.

Aren't we told for other demographics that "I'm born this way" as justification to be self-proud?

This kid is a victim, and yet a significant portion of our society is congratulating him for his self-hate as if it is "enlightened".

(07-12-2016 10:06 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Beng mediocre as a coach is the whitest privilege ever.

There is one down the road 2 miles who is by far longest tenured coach in the history of the nfl ....that has never won a playoff game. ,,,,but he is a little darker than Tubs.

(07-12-2016 03:27 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  Diversity occurs whether we like it or not.

When hiring, can you tell:

1) if someone is straight or gay?
2) if someone is conservative or liberal?
3) which church they attend if they attend or belong at all?
4) how someone feels about controversial subjects such as abortion?
5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?
6) etc.

Diversity at the point of hiring takes into account only those things that we can readily see such as sex, race, and the like.

Today, I'll focus on #1: When hiring, can you tell if someone is straight or gay?

Your position is naïve.

According to a 2013 Harris poll, 45% of employers use social media to screen employees. 12% planned on doing so in the future. These companies scour Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Have you even been on a site like Spokeo? It's creepy. I checked myself out on Spokeo a few years ago, and it was able to accurately identify who my best friend was. Unnerving. It is a treasure trove of quick information.

A quick Google search can also reveal a lot.

So if you're involved in your church, or a gay organization, or a political organization, there's a good chance there's an online presence of this activity. So yes, people can figure out if you're gay, what church you belong to, your political leanings...

But sticking specifically to the gay thing, while gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in 28 states. Ohio is one of those states.

Republicans are persistently, consistently resistant to change that. It must be important to them.

Considering the backlash to gay marriage and the barrage of "religious freedom" laws being pushed by conservative lawmakers, it is clear that "gay" is a very important issue for a segment of the population.

So...for a company or individual that simply wants to stand its ground against gays, it's not too difficult to figure things out.

A gay couple's marriage is a matter of public record. Go on Intellius or other sites like that and find out in a matter of a couple minutes.

In an interview, it is not unreasonable to discuss family, kids, etc. Does a gay person not mention their family?

Everyone's privacy went out the door years ago. If someone wants to find out about you, they will.

Also, some companies screen out undesirables before they ever apply. Do you really think gay people are flocking to apply at Chick-fil-A or Cracker Barrel? Or go work for a Lindner company?

No, they'll probably flock to companies who are known for being gay-friendly, like Starbucks, or Nationwide.

*******

As a side note, while doing a little research for this response, I ended up on the Human Rights Commission's rankings of most gay friendly and unfriendly companies. Along the way, I found out that Home Depot has a score of 100, Lowe's 20.

This turns my life upside down because I live at Lowe's. It's the only place on earth where I recreationally shop. I love that place...until now. I'm buying a fixer-upper rental property across the street and I had big plans for Lowe's.

Not anymore.

From now on it's Home Depot. I'll finally forgive them for screwing me over on a gas grill 12 years ago. I've got lots of things I need to buy there.

I'll also be sending a letter to Lowe's, enclosing my MyLowe's card with it.

I grew up conservative. I was conservative well into my late 20's and settled on left-of-center. Conservatives have worn me down. I'm heading straight into liberal land on social issues. I've had it.

(07-17-2016 12:29 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-12-2016 03:27 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  Diversity occurs whether we like it or not.

When hiring, can you tell:

1) if someone is straight or gay?
2) if someone is conservative or liberal?
3) which church they attend if they attend or belong at all?
4) how someone feels about controversial subjects such as abortion?
5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?
6) etc.

Diversity at the point of hiring takes into account only those things that we can readily see such as sex, race, and the like.

Today, I'll focus on #1: When hiring, can you tell if someone is straight or gay?

Your position is naïve.

According to a 2013 Harris poll, 45% of employers use social media to screen employees. 12% planned on doing so in the future. These companies scour Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Have you even been on a site like Spokeo? It's creepy. I checked myself out on Spokeo a few years ago, and it was able to accurately identify who my best friend was. Unnerving. It is a treasure trove of quick information.

A quick Google search can also reveal a lot.

So if you're involved in your church, or a gay organization, or a political organization, there's a good chance there's an online presence of this activity. So yes, people can figure out if you're gay, what church you belong to, your political leanings...

But sticking specifically to the gay thing, while gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in 28 states. Ohio is one of those states.

Republicans are persistently, consistently resistant to change that. It must be important to them.

Considering the backlash to gay marriage and the barrage of "religious freedom" laws being pushed by conservative lawmakers, it is clear that "gay" is a very important issue for a segment of the population.

So...for a company or individual that simply wants to stand its ground against gays, it's not too difficult to figure things out.

A gay couple's marriage is a matter of public record. Go on Intellius or other sites like that and find out in a matter of a couple minutes.

In an interview, it is not unreasonable to discuss family, kids, etc. Does a gay person not mention their family?

Everyone's privacy went out the door years ago. If someone wants to find out about you, they will.

Also, some companies screen out undesirables before they ever apply. Do you really think gay people are flocking to apply at Chick-fil-A or Cracker Barrel? Or go work for a Lindner company?

No, they'll probably flock to companies who are known for being gay-friendly, like Starbucks, or Nationwide.

*******

As a side note, while doing a little research for this response, I ended up on the Human Rights Commission's rankings of most gay friendly and unfriendly companies. Along the way, I found out that Home Depot has a score of 100, Lowe's 20.

This turns my life upside down because I live at Lowe's. It's the only place on earth where I recreationally shop. I love that place...until now. I'm buying a fixer-upper rental property across the street and I had big plans for Lowe's.

Not anymore.

From now on it's Home Depot. I'll finally forgive them for screwing me over on a gas grill 12 years ago. I've got lots of things I need to buy there.

I'll also be sending a letter to Lowe's, enclosing my MyLowe's card with it.

I grew up conservative. I was conservative well into my late 20's and settled on left-of-center. Conservatives have worn me down. I'm heading straight into liberal land on social issues. I've had it.

It seems obvious that the rights we need to curtail are the rights of conservatives.

(07-15-2016 12:47 PM)namrag Wrote:  White Boy Privilage

And this is what we get with the Diversity SJW's. Young white males who feel the need to apologize for what they are.

What other demographic in our country are being told that they need to apologize for what they are, regardless of who they are as a person?

I feel sorry for this poor kid. He is being taught to self hate.

Aren't we told for other demographics that "I'm born this way" as justification to be self-proud?

This kid is a victim, and yet a significant portion of our society is congratulating him for his self-hate as if it is "enlightened".

This is messed up. I'm all for "acknowledging your privelage" even though that's a pretty lame concept and I'm well aware that we all hold racial biases that need to be corrected.

But the idea that someone needs to apologize for being born into a higher socioeconomic status is absurd. It completely undermines all those who use their "privelage" to work even harder and provide a better world for all those below them to live in. And I'll be damned if we still don't live in a country where any single person is capable of working up that proverbial ladder and make something of themselves.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

(07-17-2016 01:35 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 12:29 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-12-2016 03:27 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  Diversity occurs whether we like it or not.

When hiring, can you tell:

1) if someone is straight or gay?
2) if someone is conservative or liberal?
3) which church they attend if they attend or belong at all?
4) how someone feels about controversial subjects such as abortion?
5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?
6) etc.

Diversity at the point of hiring takes into account only those things that we can readily see such as sex, race, and the like.

Today, I'll focus on #1: When hiring, can you tell if someone is straight or gay?

Your position is naïve.

According to a 2013 Harris poll, 45% of employers use social media to screen employees. 12% planned on doing so in the future. These companies scour Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Have you even been on a site like Spokeo? It's creepy. I checked myself out on Spokeo a few years ago, and it was able to accurately identify who my best friend was. Unnerving. It is a treasure trove of quick information.

A quick Google search can also reveal a lot.

So if you're involved in your church, or a gay organization, or a political organization, there's a good chance there's an online presence of this activity. So yes, people can figure out if you're gay, what church you belong to, your political leanings...

But sticking specifically to the gay thing, while gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in 28 states. Ohio is one of those states.

Republicans are persistently, consistently resistant to change that. It must be important to them.

Considering the backlash to gay marriage and the barrage of "religious freedom" laws being pushed by conservative lawmakers, it is clear that "gay" is a very important issue for a segment of the population.

So...for a company or individual that simply wants to stand its ground against gays, it's not too difficult to figure things out.

A gay couple's marriage is a matter of public record. Go on Intellius or other sites like that and find out in a matter of a couple minutes.

In an interview, it is not unreasonable to discuss family, kids, etc. Does a gay person not mention their family?

Everyone's privacy went out the door years ago. If someone wants to find out about you, they will.

Also, some companies screen out undesirables before they ever apply. Do you really think gay people are flocking to apply at Chick-fil-A or Cracker Barrel? Or go work for a Lindner company?

No, they'll probably flock to companies who are known for being gay-friendly, like Starbucks, or Nationwide.

*******

As a side note, while doing a little research for this response, I ended up on the Human Rights Commission's rankings of most gay friendly and unfriendly companies. Along the way, I found out that Home Depot has a score of 100, Lowe's 20.

This turns my life upside down because I live at Lowe's. It's the only place on earth where I recreationally shop. I love that place...until now. I'm buying a fixer-upper rental property across the street and I had big plans for Lowe's.

Not anymore.

From now on it's Home Depot. I'll finally forgive them for screwing me over on a gas grill 12 years ago. I've got lots of things I need to buy there.

I'll also be sending a letter to Lowe's, enclosing my MyLowe's card with it.

I grew up conservative. I was conservative well into my late 20's and settled on left-of-center. Conservatives have worn me down. I'm heading straight into liberal land on social issues. I've had it.

It seems obvious that the rights we need to curtail are the rights of conservatives.

#liberalssayyes

Liberals are the first to say they are for free speech and free thought until it isn't agreement with the way they KNOW the world should be then free speech and free thought it needs to be censored.

(07-17-2016 01:35 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 12:29 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-12-2016 03:27 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  Diversity occurs whether we like it or not.

When hiring, can you tell:

1) if someone is straight or gay?
2) if someone is conservative or liberal?
3) which church they attend if they attend or belong at all?
4) how someone feels about controversial subjects such as abortion?
5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?
6) etc.

Diversity at the point of hiring takes into account only those things that we can readily see such as sex, race, and the like.

Today, I'll focus on #1: When hiring, can you tell if someone is straight or gay?

Your position is naïve.

According to a 2013 Harris poll, 45% of employers use social media to screen employees. 12% planned on doing so in the future. These companies scour Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Have you even been on a site like Spokeo? It's creepy. I checked myself out on Spokeo a few years ago, and it was able to accurately identify who my best friend was. Unnerving. It is a treasure trove of quick information.

A quick Google search can also reveal a lot.

So if you're involved in your church, or a gay organization, or a political organization, there's a good chance there's an online presence of this activity. So yes, people can figure out if you're gay, what church you belong to, your political leanings...

But sticking specifically to the gay thing, while gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in 28 states. Ohio is one of those states.

Republicans are persistently, consistently resistant to change that. It must be important to them.

Considering the backlash to gay marriage and the barrage of "religious freedom" laws being pushed by conservative lawmakers, it is clear that "gay" is a very important issue for a segment of the population.

So...for a company or individual that simply wants to stand its ground against gays, it's not too difficult to figure things out.

A gay couple's marriage is a matter of public record. Go on Intellius or other sites like that and find out in a matter of a couple minutes.

In an interview, it is not unreasonable to discuss family, kids, etc. Does a gay person not mention their family?

Everyone's privacy went out the door years ago. If someone wants to find out about you, they will.

Also, some companies screen out undesirables before they ever apply. Do you really think gay people are flocking to apply at Chick-fil-A or Cracker Barrel? Or go work for a Lindner company?

No, they'll probably flock to companies who are known for being gay-friendly, like Starbucks, or Nationwide.

*******

As a side note, while doing a little research for this response, I ended up on the Human Rights Commission's rankings of most gay friendly and unfriendly companies. Along the way, I found out that Home Depot has a score of 100, Lowe's 20.

This turns my life upside down because I live at Lowe's. It's the only place on earth where I recreationally shop. I love that place...until now. I'm buying a fixer-upper rental property across the street and I had big plans for Lowe's.

Not anymore.

From now on it's Home Depot. I'll finally forgive them for screwing me over on a gas grill 12 years ago. I've got lots of things I need to buy there.

I'll also be sending a letter to Lowe's, enclosing my MyLowe's card with it.

I grew up conservative. I was conservative well into my late 20's and settled on left-of-center. Conservatives have worn me down. I'm heading straight into liberal land on social issues. I've had it.

It seems obvious that the rights we need to curtail are the rights of conservatives.

You shouldn't be allowed to fire someone for being gay just like you shouldn't be able to fire someone for being black or being female. Your rights don't include trampling on the rights of others.

Your response provides a great example of why I called Q's position naive.

(07-17-2016 09:22 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  #liberalssayyes

Liberals are the first to say they are for free speech and free thought until it isn't agreement with the way they KNOW the world should be then free speech and free thought it needs to be censored.

I really am curious about how many people on here believe there are NOT objective rights and wrongs in this world. And the follow up of course, is racism one of those objective wrongs?

(07-17-2016 10:39 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 01:35 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 12:29 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-12-2016 03:27 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  Diversity occurs whether we like it or not.

When hiring, can you tell:

1) if someone is straight or gay?
2) if someone is conservative or liberal?
3) which church they attend if they attend or belong at all?
4) how someone feels about controversial subjects such as abortion?
5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?
6) etc.

Diversity at the point of hiring takes into account only those things that we can readily see such as sex, race, and the like.

Today, I'll focus on #1: When hiring, can you tell if someone is straight or gay?

Your position is naïve.

According to a 2013 Harris poll, 45% of employers use social media to screen employees. 12% planned on doing so in the future. These companies scour Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Have you even been on a site like Spokeo? It's creepy. I checked myself out on Spokeo a few years ago, and it was able to accurately identify who my best friend was. Unnerving. It is a treasure trove of quick information.

A quick Google search can also reveal a lot.

So if you're involved in your church, or a gay organization, or a political organization, there's a good chance there's an online presence of this activity. So yes, people can figure out if you're gay, what church you belong to, your political leanings...

But sticking specifically to the gay thing, while gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in 28 states. Ohio is one of those states.

Republicans are persistently, consistently resistant to change that. It must be important to them.

Considering the backlash to gay marriage and the barrage of "religious freedom" laws being pushed by conservative lawmakers, it is clear that "gay" is a very important issue for a segment of the population.

So...for a company or individual that simply wants to stand its ground against gays, it's not too difficult to figure things out.

A gay couple's marriage is a matter of public record. Go on Intellius or other sites like that and find out in a matter of a couple minutes.

In an interview, it is not unreasonable to discuss family, kids, etc. Does a gay person not mention their family?

Everyone's privacy went out the door years ago. If someone wants to find out about you, they will.

Also, some companies screen out undesirables before they ever apply. Do you really think gay people are flocking to apply at Chick-fil-A or Cracker Barrel? Or go work for a Lindner company?

No, they'll probably flock to companies who are known for being gay-friendly, like Starbucks, or Nationwide.

*******

As a side note, while doing a little research for this response, I ended up on the Human Rights Commission's rankings of most gay friendly and unfriendly companies. Along the way, I found out that Home Depot has a score of 100, Lowe's 20.

This turns my life upside down because I live at Lowe's. It's the only place on earth where I recreationally shop. I love that place...until now. I'm buying a fixer-upper rental property across the street and I had big plans for Lowe's.

Not anymore.

From now on it's Home Depot. I'll finally forgive them for screwing me over on a gas grill 12 years ago. I've got lots of things I need to buy there.

I'll also be sending a letter to Lowe's, enclosing my MyLowe's card with it.

I grew up conservative. I was conservative well into my late 20's and settled on left-of-center. Conservatives have worn me down. I'm heading straight into liberal land on social issues. I've had it.

It seems obvious that the rights we need to curtail are the rights of conservatives.

You shouldn't be allowed to fire someone for being gay just like you shouldn't be able to fire someone for being black or being female. Your rights don't include trampling on the rights of others.

Your response provides a great example of why I called Q's position naive.

According to this link, you cannot be fired for being gay in any state in the union under the 1964 civil rights act:

http://www.queerty.com/guess-what-you-ca...a-20150717

Now...as to whether or not you are hired or not hired for being gay seems to be another matter entirely....at the end of the day, the employer has to provide a reason not to hire someone if pressed in legal proceedings...they would likely indicate a lack of qualifications for the position and not state that it was due to sexual orientation.

My impression is that discrimination in hiring goes on all the time...companies discriminate against:

The unqualified
The ignorant
The violent
Those who have served time in prison
Those with substance abuse issues
...and the list goes on and on....

My understanding is that if an applicant fails on any of those counts, a privately owned business is free to pass on hiring such an individual without being in violation of federal law.

(07-17-2016 12:28 PM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 10:39 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 01:35 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 12:29 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-12-2016 03:27 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  Diversity occurs whether we like it or not.

When hiring, can you tell:

1) if someone is straight or gay?
2) if someone is conservative or liberal?
3) which church they attend if they attend or belong at all?
4) how someone feels about controversial subjects such as abortion?
5) if someone likes basketball or they hate it?
6) etc.

Diversity at the point of hiring takes into account only those things that we can readily see such as sex, race, and the like.

Today, I'll focus on #1: When hiring, can you tell if someone is straight or gay?

Your position is naïve.

According to a 2013 Harris poll, 45% of employers use social media to screen employees. 12% planned on doing so in the future. These companies scour Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Have you even been on a site like Spokeo? It's creepy. I checked myself out on Spokeo a few years ago, and it was able to accurately identify who my best friend was. Unnerving. It is a treasure trove of quick information.

A quick Google search can also reveal a lot.

So if you're involved in your church, or a gay organization, or a political organization, there's a good chance there's an online presence of this activity. So yes, people can figure out if you're gay, what church you belong to, your political leanings...

But sticking specifically to the gay thing, while gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in 28 states. Ohio is one of those states.

Republicans are persistently, consistently resistant to change that. It must be important to them.

Considering the backlash to gay marriage and the barrage of "religious freedom" laws being pushed by conservative lawmakers, it is clear that "gay" is a very important issue for a segment of the population.

So...for a company or individual that simply wants to stand its ground against gays, it's not too difficult to figure things out.

A gay couple's marriage is a matter of public record. Go on Intellius or other sites like that and find out in a matter of a couple minutes.

In an interview, it is not unreasonable to discuss family, kids, etc. Does a gay person not mention their family?

Everyone's privacy went out the door years ago. If someone wants to find out about you, they will.

Also, some companies screen out undesirables before they ever apply. Do you really think gay people are flocking to apply at Chick-fil-A or Cracker Barrel? Or go work for a Lindner company?

No, they'll probably flock to companies who are known for being gay-friendly, like Starbucks, or Nationwide.

*******

As a side note, while doing a little research for this response, I ended up on the Human Rights Commission's rankings of most gay friendly and unfriendly companies. Along the way, I found out that Home Depot has a score of 100, Lowe's 20.

This turns my life upside down because I live at Lowe's. It's the only place on earth where I recreationally shop. I love that place...until now. I'm buying a fixer-upper rental property across the street and I had big plans for Lowe's.

Not anymore.

From now on it's Home Depot. I'll finally forgive them for screwing me over on a gas grill 12 years ago. I've got lots of things I need to buy there.

I'll also be sending a letter to Lowe's, enclosing my MyLowe's card with it.

I grew up conservative. I was conservative well into my late 20's and settled on left-of-center. Conservatives have worn me down. I'm heading straight into liberal land on social issues. I've had it.

It seems obvious that the rights we need to curtail are the rights of conservatives.

You shouldn't be allowed to fire someone for being gay just like you shouldn't be able to fire someone for being black or being female. Your rights don't include trampling on the rights of others.

Your response provides a great example of why I called Q's position naive.

According to this link, you cannot be fired for being gay in any state in the union under the 1964 civil rights act:

http://www.queerty.com/guess-what-you-ca...a-20150717

Now...as to whether or not you are hired or not hired for being gay seems to be another matter entirely....at the end of the day, the employer has to provide a reason not to hire someone if pressed in legal proceedings...they would likely indicate a lack of qualifications for the position and not state that it was due to sexual orientation.

My impression is that discrimination in hiring goes on all the time...companies discriminate against:

The unqualified
The ignorant
The violent
Those who have served time in prison
Those with substance abuse issues
...and the list goes on and on....

My understanding is that if an applicant fails on any of those counts, a privately owned business is free to pass on hiring such an individual without being in violation of federal law.

I cannot get to that link from my current location, but I can say with absolute certainty that the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not cover sexual orientation.

As far as the legality of "gay" being a reason to not hire. The Republican Party has been consistently in favor of this. It's usually framed as a religious issue.

Pope Francis's comments and recent apology about discrimination have been widely misinterpreted. Many think he reversed Catholic doctrine and is now deeming homosexuality as acceptable. That is simply not the case. The Catholic Church has not changed its stance on homosexuality; it has simply recognized that the manner they've handled it in the past has caused unjust discrimination against an entire class of people. The Catholic Church considers that a sin.

My point in bringing this up is that the Republicans are using "religion" as the issue to pass these anti-gay laws. I can use religion - in this case, the Pope - to explain why those very laws violate my religious beliefs.

The Republican Party has been hijacked by the religious right that isn't about freedom of religion. It's a nasty force that's about imposing a particular brand of conservative religion to the exclusion of any other religion. I'll have none of it.

(07-18-2016 09:16 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 12:28 PM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 10:39 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 01:35 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 12:29 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  Today, I'll focus on #1: When hiring, can you tell if someone is straight or gay?

Your position is naïve.

According to a 2013 Harris poll, 45% of employers use social media to screen employees. 12% planned on doing so in the future. These companies scour Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Have you even been on a site like Spokeo? It's creepy. I checked myself out on Spokeo a few years ago, and it was able to accurately identify who my best friend was. Unnerving. It is a treasure trove of quick information.

A quick Google search can also reveal a lot.

So if you're involved in your church, or a gay organization, or a political organization, there's a good chance there's an online presence of this activity. So yes, people can figure out if you're gay, what church you belong to, your political leanings...

But sticking specifically to the gay thing, while gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in 28 states. Ohio is one of those states.

Republicans are persistently, consistently resistant to change that. It must be important to them.

Considering the backlash to gay marriage and the barrage of "religious freedom" laws being pushed by conservative lawmakers, it is clear that "gay" is a very important issue for a segment of the population.

So...for a company or individual that simply wants to stand its ground against gays, it's not too difficult to figure things out.

A gay couple's marriage is a matter of public record. Go on Intellius or other sites like that and find out in a matter of a couple minutes.

In an interview, it is not unreasonable to discuss family, kids, etc. Does a gay person not mention their family?

Everyone's privacy went out the door years ago. If someone wants to find out about you, they will.

Also, some companies screen out undesirables before they ever apply. Do you really think gay people are flocking to apply at Chick-fil-A or Cracker Barrel? Or go work for a Lindner company?

No, they'll probably flock to companies who are known for being gay-friendly, like Starbucks, or Nationwide.

*******

As a side note, while doing a little research for this response, I ended up on the Human Rights Commission's rankings of most gay friendly and unfriendly companies. Along the way, I found out that Home Depot has a score of 100, Lowe's 20.

This turns my life upside down because I live at Lowe's. It's the only place on earth where I recreationally shop. I love that place...until now. I'm buying a fixer-upper rental property across the street and I had big plans for Lowe's.

Not anymore.

From now on it's Home Depot. I'll finally forgive them for screwing me over on a gas grill 12 years ago. I've got lots of things I need to buy there.

I'll also be sending a letter to Lowe's, enclosing my MyLowe's card with it.

I grew up conservative. I was conservative well into my late 20's and settled on left-of-center. Conservatives have worn me down. I'm heading straight into liberal land on social issues. I've had it.

It seems obvious that the rights we need to curtail are the rights of conservatives.

You shouldn't be allowed to fire someone for being gay just like you shouldn't be able to fire someone for being black or being female. Your rights don't include trampling on the rights of others.

Your response provides a great example of why I called Q's position naive.

According to this link, you cannot be fired for being gay in any state in the union under the 1964 civil rights act:

http://www.queerty.com/guess-what-you-ca...a-20150717

Now...as to whether or not you are hired or not hired for being gay seems to be another matter entirely....at the end of the day, the employer has to provide a reason not to hire someone if pressed in legal proceedings...they would likely indicate a lack of qualifications for the position and not state that it was due to sexual orientation.

My impression is that discrimination in hiring goes on all the time...companies discriminate against:

The unqualified
The ignorant
The violent
Those who have served time in prison
Those with substance abuse issues
...and the list goes on and on....

My understanding is that if an applicant fails on any of those counts, a privately owned business is free to pass on hiring such an individual without being in violation of federal law.

I cannot get to that link from my current location, but I can say with absolute certainty that the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not cover sexual orientation.

As far as the legality of "gay" being a reason to not hire. The Republican Party has been consistently in favor of this. It's usually framed as a religious issue.

Pope Francis's comments and recent apology about discrimination have been widely misinterpreted. Many think he reversed Catholic doctrine and is now deeming homosexuality as acceptable. That is simply not the case. The Catholic Church has not changed its stance on homosexuality; it has simply recognized that the manner they've handled it in the past has caused unjust discrimination against an entire class of people. The Catholic Church considers that a sin.

My point in bringing this up is that the Republicans are using "religion" as the issue to pass these anti-gay laws. I can use religion - in this case, the Pope - to explain why those very laws violate my religious beliefs.

The Republican Party has been hijacked by the religious right that isn't about freedom of religion. It's a nasty force that's about imposing a particular brand of conservative religion to the exclusion of any other religion. I'll have none of it.

The content of the aforementioned link follows:

“After last month’s historic move to nationally recognize same-sex marriages, the next battlegrounds for gay rights in America are housing and employment protections.
Now it seems a major step has been taken on the latter, potentially putting to rest for good the ability to fire an employee based on his or her sexual orientation. That’s huge!
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, created to enforce and implement the 1964 Civil Rights Act, ruled this week that workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation is illegal.
The ruling states that employers who discriminate against LGBT workers are violating Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employment discrimination “based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin.”
It’s a new interpretation of the law with wide-reaching potential.
In the past, courts have ruled that Title VII doesn’t apply to sexual orientation because it isn’t explicitly mentioned, but the new interpretation accounts for LGBT discrimination under the umbrella of sex discrimination.
“Sexual orientation discrimination is sex discrimination because it necessarily entails treating an employee less favorably because of the employee’s sex,” the EEOC concluded.
It’s similar to how racial discrimination extends to relationships. Just as a man can’t be fired for dating a woman of a different race, the same man can’t be fired for dating a person of the same sex.
Oddly enough, Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote the dissent in the marriage equality case, hinted at this same logic during sessions considering whether or not to take the case.
“If Sue loves Joe and Tom loves Joe, Sue can marry him and Tom can’t,” Roberts argued in April. “And the difference is based upon their different sex. Why isn’t that a straightforward question of sexual discrimination?”
What remains unclear is how this new interpretation will affect current efforts to pass legislation specific to protecting LGBT employees.
Of course, these new guidelines only help if you can prove you were fired for being gay. But it’s a cause for celebration nonetheless.”

http://www.queerty.com/guess-what-you-ca...a-20150717

So...this new ruling puts sexual orientation under the umbrella of the Civil Rights act. Thus, you cannot be fired for being gay under federal law anywhere in the US.

Now...as to the imposition of fundamentalist Christian orthodoxy within the continental US...it seems to me that they are losing both popular and legislative support over the past several decades. They have lost the battle over:

1. Gay marriage
2. Abortion
3. Premarital sex
4. Birth Control
5. Legalization of drugs
6. No-fault divorce

An interesting piece is here:

http://www.salon.com/2016/01/31/theyll_a...p_winning/

I'm certain that within a relatively short period of time, fundamentalist Christianity will be as outmoded as the Model T--destined for the scrap-heap of history. The question becomes, what do we do with the remaining few that still adhere to such arcane beliefs? Public ridicule is all well and good, but ultimately, to purge their influence, you have to purge those who practice it. Now...Marx and Engels had a solution for this, and, given time and tide, I'm certain it will take root here. We've had recent progress with the jailing of that county clerk in KY who wouldn't put her name on same-sex marriage certificates. But this doesn't go far enough...it should eventually progress to confiscation of property and fines to go along with incarceration. At that point, the Christian religion will be driven underground and ultimately perish.

The fly in the ointment comes with fundamentalist Islam which proscribes the death penalty for non-believers (including those who are gay). They have proven dedicated enough to their cause that they will gladly die trying to convert all to Islam. I would imagine that death by attrition would be the only solution at that point....