3 ms·

In regards to Vidappy (and I hope they're listening): These founders seriously need to examine and address the legal issues associated with this idea. If your

In regards to Vidappy (and I hope they're listening): These founders seriously need to examine and address the legal issues associated with this idea. If your target clients are big-name companies, particularly if actual candidate skills are less relevant, there are serious Equal Employment Opportunity issues to resolve. This whole idea is a giant class-action lawsuit waiting to happen. I take this issue very seriously because I just took some MBA classes regarding human resources. At a very basic level, this idea is designed to let potential employers prejudice potential hires. Job candidates are legally protected from this specific idea in the same way they're protected from job application questions like race, age, nationality, and other questions that are not directly job-related. In so many words, if the candidate is qualified for the job, the hiring manager doesn't legally get a choice as to whether he likes the way the candidate looks.

Klinky 15y ago
In so many words, if the candidate is qualified for the job, the hiring manager doesn't legally get a choice as to whether he likes the way the candidate looks. How is the person who was declined for the job even going to know they were discriminated against? Hiring discrimination goes on all the time. I am doubtful that VidAppy makes this any easier for hiring managers to do.
chrisaycock 15y ago
The qualifications for these retail jobs are character-based; the employee must present himself well and make the customer feel at ease. Looking like a thug has nothing to do with race or age, but has a lot to do with scaring away the clientele.
benmccann 15y ago
By that logic interviewing people in person would put you in jeopardy of violating EEO laws. How does doing an interview over the net instead of in person change anything?
jefowler4th 15y ago
@citizenkeys You're making the assumption that the applicant applied for a specific job and/or Company. An employer checking out videos on this site is not the same thing. If that were true, an employer would be required to interview every profile they looked at on Monster and CareerBuilder. I agree with @benmccann, by your logic in-person interviews would violate EEO laws.

Klinky 15y ago

In so many words, if the candidate is qualified for the job, the hiring manager doesn't legally get a choice as to whether he likes the way the candidate looks. How is the person who was declined for the job even going to know they were discriminated against? Hiring discrimination goes on all the time. I am doubtful that VidAppy makes this any easier for hiring managers to do.

chrisaycock 15y ago

The qualifications for these retail jobs are character-based; the employee must present himself well and make the customer feel at ease. Looking like a thug has nothing to do with race or age, but has a lot to do with scaring away the clientele.

benmccann 15y ago

By that logic interviewing people in person would put you in jeopardy of violating EEO laws. How does doing an interview over the net instead of in person change anything?

jefowler4th 15y ago

@citizenkeys You're making the assumption that the applicant applied for a specific job and/or Company. An employer checking out videos on this site is not the same thing. If that were true, an employer would be required to interview every profile they looked at on Monster and CareerBuilder. I agree with @benmccann, by your logic in-person interviews would violate EEO laws.