Yummm! Whiny conservative tears taste so good.

(07-03-2014 11:03 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:04 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 05:10 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

Quote:Each year JP Morgan Chase sends its employees a survey asking questions related to management and other non-controversial issues. A longtime Chase employee told Professor Robert George of Princeton that the survey this year included the following questions for the first time:


Are you:

1) A person with disabilities;

2) A person with children with disabilities;

3) A person with a spouse/domestic partner with disabilities;

4) A member of the LGBT community.

5) An ally of the LGBT community, but not personally identifying as LGBT.

I'm not sure how any of these questions are legal, but certainly point to inappropriate conduct by JPM management.

No Agenda here

The first question might be legal, but maybe not. The way to ask that question in a job interview is "are you physically and mentally capable of doing the job you applied for?"

The other questions are not legal at all.

Absolutely legal at least on the Gay issue. Even though this appears to be a confidential questionaire, even if not, it is LEGAL to fire someone for being Gay or Gay supportive. Therefore it is LEGAL to fire someone for not being Gay or Gay supportive. Of course that's not what's happening here.

Tom, the only way for a company to know if you're gay or supportive is if you tell them and it's illegal for them to ask.

(07-03-2014 11:58 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:03 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:04 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 05:10 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

Quote:Each year JP Morgan Chase sends its employees a survey asking questions related to management and other non-controversial issues. A longtime Chase employee told Professor Robert George of Princeton that the survey this year included the following questions for the first time:


Are you:

1) A person with disabilities;

2) A person with children with disabilities;

3) A person with a spouse/domestic partner with disabilities;

4) A member of the LGBT community.

5) An ally of the LGBT community, but not personally identifying as LGBT.

I'm not sure how any of these questions are legal, but certainly point to inappropriate conduct by JPM management.

No Agenda here

The first question might be legal, but maybe not. The way to ask that question in a job interview is "are you physically and mentally capable of doing the job you applied for?"

The other questions are not legal at all.

Absolutely legal at least on the Gay issue. Even though this appears to be a confidential questionaire, even if not, it is LEGAL to fire someone for being Gay or Gay supportive. Therefore it is LEGAL to fire someone for not being Gay or Gay supportive. Of course that's not what's happening here.

Tom, the only way for a company to know if you're gay or supportive is if you tell them and it's illegal for them to ask.

Hey man, don't do that to Tom. He's still pushing the fallacy that he's a legal wunderkind.

(07-03-2014 11:51 AM)Cali_Cat Wrote:  Yummm! Whiny conservative tears taste so good.

That's a little creepy.


Posted from the shallow recesses of my feeble mind.

(07-03-2014 12:28 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:51 AM)Cali_Cat Wrote:  Yummm! Whiny conservative tears taste so good.

That's a little creepy.

And stupid.

This type of thing could be used against gays in a heartbeat.

(07-03-2014 01:01 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 12:28 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:51 AM)Cali_Cat Wrote:  Yummm! Whiny conservative tears taste so good.

That's a little creepy.

And stupid.

This type of thing could be used against gays in a heartbeat.

It's the paranoia that gives it that special flavor...

(07-03-2014 11:58 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:03 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:04 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 05:10 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

Quote:Each year JP Morgan Chase sends its employees a survey asking questions related to management and other non-controversial issues. A longtime Chase employee told Professor Robert George of Princeton that the survey this year included the following questions for the first time:


Are you:

1) A person with disabilities;

2) A person with children with disabilities;

3) A person with a spouse/domestic partner with disabilities;

4) A member of the LGBT community.

5) An ally of the LGBT community, but not personally identifying as LGBT.

I'm not sure how any of these questions are legal, but certainly point to inappropriate conduct by JPM management.

No Agenda here

The first question might be legal, but maybe not. The way to ask that question in a job interview is "are you physically and mentally capable of doing the job you applied for?"

The other questions are not legal at all.

Absolutely legal at least on the Gay issue. Even though this appears to be a confidential questionaire, even if not, it is LEGAL to fire someone for being Gay or Gay supportive. Therefore it is LEGAL to fire someone for not being Gay or Gay supportive. Of course that's not what's happening here.

Tom, the only way for a company to know if you're gay or supportive is if you tell them and it's illegal for them to ask.

Its completely LEGAL for them to ask then fire you for whatever answer you give them. Its also completely LEGAL for them to investigate you and fire you for the mere SUSPICION that you might be Gay (or straight for that matter).

There has been legislation introduced in Congress each session for the last 30 years to resolve this issue. The current iteration is called "The Employment Non-Discrimination Act" or ENDA. It has been blocked, repeatedly, by the Republicans.

It is true, however, that various jurisdictions below the Federal level have enacted workplace protections that cover sexual orientation and/or gender identity. However, since these are not FEDERAL laws, they don't provide the same access to other Federal remedies that inclusion of sexual orientation as a protected class (along with the existing protections held by RELIGION) would provide.

However, in the case of a confidential questionaire attached to a survey, questions as those asked would remain legal.

(07-03-2014 11:09 AM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 09:15 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 09:08 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  Do they also have open spots on advisory boards for healthy heterosexuals?

Their advisory board is called...."The Board of Directors". I'll sure the LGBT groups and the disabled persons will trade.

The Boards and Officers of Fortune 500 companies are comprised of more gay people than racial minorities; and, they are majority pro-gay everything. So, this "advisory board" is merely a pretext to let employees know where the company stands and they they had better get on board with this ideology or they will be fired (of course for something else). It's just that simple.

Any back up on that. Cause it'd be news to me to find any significant number of openly Gay Board Members of major corporations.

(07-03-2014 01:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its completely LEGAL for them to ask then fire you for whatever answer you give them. Its also completely LEGAL for them to investigate you and fire you for the mere SUSPICION that you might be Gay (or straight for that matter).

There has been legislation introduced in Congress each session for the last 30 years to resolve this issue. The current iteration is called "The Employment Non-Discrimination Act" or ENDA. It has been blocked, repeatedly, by the Republicans.

It is true, however, that various jurisdictions below the Federal level have enacted workplace protections that cover sexual orientation and/or gender identity. However, since these are not FEDERAL laws, they don't provide the same access to other Federal remedies that inclusion of sexual orientation as a protected class (along with the existing protections held by RELIGION) would provide.

However, in the case of a confidential questionaire attached to a survey, questions as those asked would remain legal.

Lol, never have I seen anything like that before. We had a guy that confessed to having HIV and let it be known he was gay. We would have been in very hot water and risked a hefty lawsuit if we'd have fired him simply for being gay or having HIV. And this is Louisiana, so don't come in here with your BS just because it makes gays sound like victims. Anybody that has ever dealt with hiring and firing from a company knows that what you're saying is complete and utter bullshiit.

(07-03-2014 01:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:58 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:03 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:04 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 05:10 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  I'm not sure how any of these questions are legal, but certainly point to inappropriate conduct by JPM management.

No Agenda here

The first question might be legal, but maybe not. The way to ask that question in a job interview is "are you physically and mentally capable of doing the job you applied for?"

The other questions are not legal at all.

Absolutely legal at least on the Gay issue. Even though this appears to be a confidential questionaire, even if not, it is LEGAL to fire someone for being Gay or Gay supportive. Therefore it is LEGAL to fire someone for not being Gay or Gay supportive. Of course that's not what's happening here.

Tom, the only way for a company to know if you're gay or supportive is if you tell them and it's illegal for them to ask.

Its completely LEGAL for them to ask then fire you for whatever answer you give them. Its also completely LEGAL for them to investigate you and fire you for the mere SUSPICION that you might be Gay (or straight for that matter).

There has been legislation introduced in Congress each session for the last 30 years to resolve this issue. The current iteration is called "The Employment Non-Discrimination Act" or ENDA. It has been blocked, repeatedly, by the Republicans.

It is true, however, that various jurisdictions below the Federal level have enacted workplace protections that cover sexual orientation and/or gender identity. However, since these are not FEDERAL laws, they don't provide the same access to other Federal remedies that inclusion of sexual orientation as a protected class (along with the existing protections held by RELIGION) would provide.

However, in the case of a confidential questionaire attached to a survey, questions as those asked would remain legal.

Look everyone, more of that legal "razzle-dazzle" that Tom is known for. If I'm in legal trouble, I'll just fire up the bat-signal and the legal wunderkind named Tom will show up to save the day.

(07-03-2014 01:30 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 01:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Its completely LEGAL for them to ask then fire you for whatever answer you give them. Its also completely LEGAL for them to investigate you and fire you for the mere SUSPICION that you might be Gay (or straight for that matter).

There has been legislation introduced in Congress each session for the last 30 years to resolve this issue. The current iteration is called "The Employment Non-Discrimination Act" or ENDA. It has been blocked, repeatedly, by the Republicans.

It is true, however, that various jurisdictions below the Federal level have enacted workplace protections that cover sexual orientation and/or gender identity. However, since these are not FEDERAL laws, they don't provide the same access to other Federal remedies that inclusion of sexual orientation as a protected class (along with the existing protections held by RELIGION) would provide.

However, in the case of a confidential questionaire attached to a survey, questions as those asked would remain legal.

Lol, never have I seen anything like that before. We had a guy that confessed to having HIV and let it be known he was gay. We would have been in very hot water and risked a hefty lawsuit if we'd have fired him simply for being gay or having HIV. And this is Louisiana, so don't come in here with your BS just because it makes gays sound like victims. Anybody that has ever dealt with hiring and firing from a company knows that what you're saying is complete and utter bullshiit.

(07-03-2014 01:36 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  Look everyone, more of that legal "razzle-dazzle" that Tom is known for. If I'm in legal trouble, I'll just fire up the bat-signal and the legal wunderkind named Tom will show up to save the day.

Better make sure its a rainbow if you want tom to show up.

(07-03-2014 01:52 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 01:36 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  Look everyone, more of that legal "razzle-dazzle" that Tom is known for. If I'm in legal trouble, I'll just fire up the bat-signal and the legal wunderkind named Tom will show up to save the day.

Better make sure its a rainbow if you want tom to show up.

YOu people are too much!!!


*** and, by "you people", I meant the plain definition of the phrase. it was not meant to group you by race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. just don't want the (you people)*stopo after me

(07-03-2014 01:59 PM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 01:52 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 01:36 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  Look everyone, more of that legal "razzle-dazzle" that Tom is known for. If I'm in legal trouble, I'll just fire up the bat-signal and the legal wunderkind named Tom will show up to save the day.

Better make sure its a rainbow if you want tom to show up.

YOu people are too much!!!


*** and, by "you people", I meant the plain definition of the phrase. it was not meant to group you by race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. just don't want the (you people)*stopo after me

What are you talking about? I think you've tuned into the wrong channel.

(07-03-2014 01:59 PM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 01:52 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 01:36 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  Look everyone, more of that legal "razzle-dazzle" that Tom is known for. If I'm in legal trouble, I'll just fire up the bat-signal and the legal wunderkind named Tom will show up to save the day.

Better make sure its a rainbow if you want tom to show up.

YOu people are too much!!!


*** and, by "you people", I meant the plain definition of the phrase. it was not meant to group you by race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. just don't want the (you people)*stopo after me

(07-03-2014 08:52 AM)Doctor Krieger Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 08:50 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 08:46 AM)Doctor Krieger Wrote:  How is that requiring all employees to be pro-LGBT? Do you think if someone say no, they're gonna actually can said person?

SO we arent going to hear any squealing from the left if a dozen gay members get canned from Chase next week?

It works both ways, which is why you dont do it.

WHat does any of this have to do with someone's job? If it doesnt, dont ask. Simple as that.

Yeah it's stupid, don't understand why they would do it in the first place rather than just being a big brother wanna-be and get more info about their employees.

But I don't think they'd actually can you for your answers either way like you seem to imply.

No but you would move up to the front of the line the next time there were layoffs...

(07-03-2014 01:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:58 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:03 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:04 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 05:10 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  I'm not sure how any of these questions are legal, but certainly point to inappropriate conduct by JPM management.

No Agenda here

The first question might be legal, but maybe not. The way to ask that question in a job interview is "are you physically and mentally capable of doing the job you applied for?"

The other questions are not legal at all.

Absolutely legal at least on the Gay issue. Even though this appears to be a confidential questionaire, even if not, it is LEGAL to fire someone for being Gay or Gay supportive. Therefore it is LEGAL to fire someone for not being Gay or Gay supportive. Of course that's not what's happening here.

Tom, the only way for a company to know if you're gay or supportive is if you tell them and it's illegal for them to ask.

Its completely LEGAL for them to ask then fire you for whatever answer you give them. Its also completely LEGAL for them to investigate you and fire you for the mere SUSPICION that you might be Gay (or straight for that matter).

There has been legislation introduced in Congress each session for the last 30 years to resolve this issue. The current iteration is called "The Employment Non-Discrimination Act" or ENDA. It has been blocked, repeatedly, by the Republicans.

It is true, however, that various jurisdictions below the Federal level have enacted workplace protections that cover sexual orientation and/or gender identity. However, since these are not FEDERAL laws, they don't provide the same access to other Federal remedies that inclusion of sexual orientation as a protected class (along with the existing protections held by RELIGION) would provide.

However, in the case of a confidential questionaire attached to a survey, questions as those asked would remain legal.

It WHAT UNIVERSE would EEOC laws NOT protect against this. Question #5 could most certainly be considered encroachment on religious freedom.


Did Obama eliminate EEOC laws with an Executive Order?

(07-03-2014 09:03 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 05:10 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

Quote:Each year JP Morgan Chase sends its employees a survey asking questions related to management and other non-controversial issues. A longtime Chase employee told Professor Robert George of Princeton that the survey this year included the following questions for the first time:


Are you:

1) A person with disabilities;

2) A person with children with disabilities;

3) A person with a spouse/domestic partner with disabilities;

4) A member of the LGBT community.

5) An ally of the LGBT community, but not personally identifying as LGBT.

I'm not sure how any of these questions are legal, but certainly point to inappropriate conduct by JPM management.

No Agenda here

They are simply looking for persons willing to serve on a LGBT or disabled persons advisory boards. Or simply attempting to divide up what is most likely a confidential questionaire into subgroups so they can ensure that employee concerns about management aren't concentrated in one particular subgroup. Completely legitimate. Completely legal too.

Robert George works with groups that advocate CRIMINAL penalties simply for being Gay. I think that rises well beyond Chase simply looking to fill spots on advisory boards.

Total BS!!!! I have worked for several large companies and they didn't do what JPM did to accomplish this. They formed Affinity groups championed by Executive appointees and threw in a little money so these groups could get started by doing some community service projects. They didn't ask anyone to fill out a questionnaire, rather posted the creation of these groups on the employee website and invited interested parties to join.

This is nothing more than an intimidation tactic to force acceptance. Coercing employees to say they are Ally of the LGBT community even if they are not. Textbook Muslim tactic to win over new converts, switch or die.

(07-03-2014 11:03 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:04 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 05:10 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

Quote:Each year JP Morgan Chase sends its employees a survey asking questions related to management and other non-controversial issues. A longtime Chase employee told Professor Robert George of Princeton that the survey this year included the following questions for the first time:


Are you:

1) A person with disabilities;

2) A person with children with disabilities;

3) A person with a spouse/domestic partner with disabilities;

4) A member of the LGBT community.

5) An ally of the LGBT community, but not personally identifying as LGBT.

I'm not sure how any of these questions are legal, but certainly point to inappropriate conduct by JPM management.

No Agenda here

The first question might be legal, but maybe not. The way to ask that question in a job interview is "are you physically and mentally capable of doing the job you applied for?"

The other questions are not legal at all.

Absolutely legal at least on the Gay issue. Even though this appears to be a confidential questionaire, even if not, it is LEGAL to fire someone for being Gay or Gay supportive. Therefore it is LEGAL to fire someone for not being Gay or Gay supportive. Of course that's not what's happening here.

Tom, the article (or a linked article) said the questionnaire was NOT confidential. They were required to put their employee number on the questionnaire when they turned it in. That means anyone who knew the employee records would know exactly who filled out the application and what they answered with.

That's intimidation by a company anyway you look at it.

(07-03-2014 05:05 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 01:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:58 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:03 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 10:04 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  The first question might be legal, but maybe not. The way to ask that question in a job interview is "are you physically and mentally capable of doing the job you applied for?"

The other questions are not legal at all.

Absolutely legal at least on the Gay issue. Even though this appears to be a confidential questionaire, even if not, it is LEGAL to fire someone for being Gay or Gay supportive. Therefore it is LEGAL to fire someone for not being Gay or Gay supportive. Of course that's not what's happening here.

Tom, the only way for a company to know if you're gay or supportive is if you tell them and it's illegal for them to ask.

Its completely LEGAL for them to ask then fire you for whatever answer you give them. Its also completely LEGAL for them to investigate you and fire you for the mere SUSPICION that you might be Gay (or straight for that matter).

There has been legislation introduced in Congress each session for the last 30 years to resolve this issue. The current iteration is called "The Employment Non-Discrimination Act" or ENDA. It has been blocked, repeatedly, by the Republicans.

It is true, however, that various jurisdictions below the Federal level have enacted workplace protections that cover sexual orientation and/or gender identity. However, since these are not FEDERAL laws, they don't provide the same access to other Federal remedies that inclusion of sexual orientation as a protected class (along with the existing protections held by RELIGION) would provide.

However, in the case of a confidential questionaire attached to a survey, questions as those asked would remain legal.

It WHAT UNIVERSE would EEOC laws NOT protect against this. Question #5 could most certainly be considered encroachment on religious freedom.


Did Obama eliminate EEOC laws with an Executive Order?

Completely legal to ask under Federal Law. Sexual Orientation isn't protected.