4 ms·
> Of course, not all experience is equal, but experience is still important. Would you say the same thing if someone used similar dog whistles to talk about ol
by stale2002 8y ago
> Of course, not all experience is equal, but experience is still important.
Would you say the same thing if someone used similar dog whistles to talk about old people?
IE, "oh, being able to move quickly and think on your fit is important, and sometimes this can only be gained by being in good physical shape, and having good health, like a young person would have".
Either discrimination is OK or it isn't. One person's justifications aren't any different than another person's.
- chrisbennet 8y agoYour example isn’t really discrimination if you’re looking for fire fighters. “Experience” is largely acquired by making mistakes. People don’t care how old you are, they care how many years of experience you’ve acquired. I guess you can call it discrimination but only if you think hiring people “who are good at their job” discriminates against people aren’t. Of course, this is a US centric view, it could be totally different where you live.
- cortesoft 8y agoI mean, if you are going to be THAT loose in your definition of 'discrimination', then basically everything is discrimination. It would be discrimination to hire someone who is a better programmer, because you are unfairly advantaging people who have more skill. So yes, you are allowed to discriminate on those sorts of things. If the attribute you are discriminating for is relevant to the job, it is ok to discriminate. Take, for example, discrimination against the physically disabled - if a construction company requires that you are able to lift 50 pound bags of concrete, it wouldn't be guilt of unlawful discrimination because that is required for the job. On the other hand, if you require someone be able to lift a 50 pound bag, but their job is to sit at a desk and program a computer... then you would be found guilty of unfair discrimination against the disabled.
- stale2002 8y agoI am not being loose in my definition of discrimination. Instead I am using the exact same definition of description that the people in the lawsuit are using. IE age discrimination. Either age discrimination is morally OK or it isn't. I'd be fine with either the situation of age discrimination being disallowed or allowed, across the board, regardless of whether the discrimination is against young or old people. Either way. I just want age discrimination against young and old people to be treated exactly the same.