4 ms·
> it opens up the potential employer to discrimination. This argument never seemed to hold any water for me. Ok, most cases of "discrimination lawsuit" were b
by RealityVoid 7y ago
> it opens up the potential employer to discrimination.
This argument never seemed to hold any water for me. Ok, most cases of "discrimination lawsuit" were because people were discriminated negatively, not positively. Wouldn't discarding the resume _because it has a picture_ have the exact result that the person discriminated person complained of? If that is so, it seems NOT accepting the resume would open you to lawsuits, not accepting it. Yet, I don't see a lot of fuss being made about job-seekers claiming discrimination because of CV pictures out there.
- erikpukinskis 7y ago“People who put pictures on their resumes” are not a protected class.
- RealityVoid 7y agoYes, but "black people" is and you can easily extract that form a picture. Outright removing the CV because of the picture, regardless of reason, can be argued that you _actually_ did that because of being a protected class. Of course, it's probably easier if you can prove that you discard _all_ CV's with pictures anyways. But have some exceptions go through and you might get screwed. Regardless, if you don't have a clearly stated policy of dismissing CV's with pictures, it just feels like an asshole move, frankly.
- HeyLaughingBoy 7y agoOf course, it's probably easier if you can prove that you discard _all_ CV's with pictures anyways That's exactly why it's done.