4 ms·

Is it possible that employers could think that your political aspirations may outweigh your commitment to working consistently for them into the future? Links f

by prawn 3y ago

Is it possible that employers could think that your political aspirations may outweigh your commitment to working consistently for them into the future? Links from your site: https://gavinhoward.com/2020/06/i-am-running-for-office/ https://gavinhoward.com/2020/06/i-am-running-for-office/ https://gab.com/gavinhoward https://gab.com/gavinhoward

dvt 3y ago
An employer cannot retaliate if you're running for office or have whatever political beliefs you may have. This is from the California Labor Code, but if I remember correctly, every State has this protection in place: > Labor Code section 1101 prohibits an employer from preventing employees from engaging or participating in politics or preventing employees from becoming candidates for public office.
- prawn 3y ago
  Of course. But I bet many are quietly influenced by something like this, especially smaller employers who don't want to lose an employee and have to rehire.
- jedberg 3y ago
  Sure but if you never hire them then you don't have to worry about it.
  - dvt 3y ago
    Yes of course, this is also how people get around ageism (you're simply "not a good fit"). All in all, it still doesn't make it right.
    - wiseowise 3y ago
      > All in all, it still doesn't make it right. Sure it does. It may suck from a perspective of a candidate, but it’s a fair business position to value cohesion in a team.
      - otoburb 3y ago
        >>Sure it does. I can't comment on other jurisdictions, but the United States has a section of legislation called the Civil Rights Act Title VII[1] codifying that discrimination on the basis of a variety of factors (age included) is actually not (legally) right. I think this is hard to enforce in practice, but just to be clear -- it's not (technically) "right" to be ageist in one's hiring practices in the US. [1] https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civil-rights-center/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-of-1964 https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civil-rig...
        Ylpertnodi 3y ago
        We have similar anti-discriminatory rules in the various parts of eu. The answer is always: 'prove the discrimination'. Candidates can rarely afford to even consider bringing a case.
- flir 3y ago
  Safest never to make him an employee, then.
gavinhoward 3y ago
You didn't read far enough. My campaign has been terminated and will stay terminated. I lost the motivation to continue.
- prawn 3y ago
  I can appreciate that plans and motivations change, but I read that page about intent and the update at the bottom was about getting a letter from Romney. FYI, I'd found the campaign content from the Gab link, which didn't have the campaign-termination announcement. "If I lose, I will run for Senate of the United States against Mitt Romney in 2024. I will not go away." "And if I lose, I will then run for President of the United States in 2028 since that is the first year I will be eligible. I will not go away." This might reflect poorly on you in the eyes of an employer wondering if you were distracted by political priorities, and/or not seeing it through? Could explain the job fortunes.
  - gavinhoward 3y ago
    Oh, yes, I'd better post it to Gab. Let's just say that there was an external reason why I lost motivation that I could tell a potential employer, and they would understand. I won't repeat it on HN though. In reality, I know why I'm not getting a job. I'll not a good fit for sterile office work. And that's okay for both me and companies; their are right to avoid hiring me.
    - prawn 3y ago
      As long as you're not surprised by the dampening on your job prospects. I feel like there's a difference between not being a good fit, and not getting the opportunity to prove you're not a good fit. Some of your filter, as many are suggesting, is well before the interview process. I'm mid-40s and have worked for myself since my late teens. I recently realised that I'm likely unemployable in a traditional office sense, and so will need to make everything work off my own back until retirement. Things are good now, but prospects and perceptions change quickly with age, depending on your field.

by prawn 3y ago

dvt 3y ago

An employer cannot retaliate if you're running for office or have whatever political beliefs you may have. This is from the California Labor Code, but if I remember correctly, every State has this protection in place: > Labor Code section 1101 prohibits an employer from preventing employees from engaging or participating in politics or preventing employees from becoming candidates for public office.

prawn 3y ago
Of course. But I bet many are quietly influenced by something like this, especially smaller employers who don't want to lose an employee and have to rehire.
jedberg 3y ago
Sure but if you never hire them then you don't have to worry about it.
- dvt 3y ago
  Yes of course, this is also how people get around ageism (you're simply "not a good fit"). All in all, it still doesn't make it right.
  - wiseowise 3y ago
    > All in all, it still doesn't make it right. Sure it does. It may suck from a perspective of a candidate, but it’s a fair business position to value cohesion in a team.
    - otoburb 3y ago
      >>Sure it does. I can't comment on other jurisdictions, but the United States has a section of legislation called the Civil Rights Act Title VII[1] codifying that discrimination on the basis of a variety of factors (age included) is actually not (legally) right. I think this is hard to enforce in practice, but just to be clear -- it's not (technically) "right" to be ageist in one's hiring practices in the US. [1] https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civil-rights-center/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-of-1964 https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civil-rig...
      - Ylpertnodi 3y ago
        We have similar anti-discriminatory rules in the various parts of eu. The answer is always: 'prove the discrimination'. Candidates can rarely afford to even consider bringing a case.
flir 3y ago
Safest never to make him an employee, then.

gavinhoward 3y ago

You didn't read far enough. My campaign has been terminated and will stay terminated. I lost the motivation to continue.

prawn 3y ago
I can appreciate that plans and motivations change, but I read that page about intent and the update at the bottom was about getting a letter from Romney. FYI, I'd found the campaign content from the Gab link, which didn't have the campaign-termination announcement. "If I lose, I will run for Senate of the United States against Mitt Romney in 2024. I will not go away." "And if I lose, I will then run for President of the United States in 2028 since that is the first year I will be eligible. I will not go away." This might reflect poorly on you in the eyes of an employer wondering if you were distracted by political priorities, and/or not seeing it through? Could explain the job fortunes.
- gavinhoward 3y ago
  Oh, yes, I'd better post it to Gab. Let's just say that there was an external reason why I lost motivation that I could tell a potential employer, and they would understand. I won't repeat it on HN though. In reality, I know why I'm not getting a job. I'll not a good fit for sterile office work. And that's okay for both me and companies; their are right to avoid hiring me.
  - prawn 3y ago
    As long as you're not surprised by the dampening on your job prospects. I feel like there's a difference between not being a good fit, and not getting the opportunity to prove you're not a good fit. Some of your filter, as many are suggesting, is well before the interview process. I'm mid-40s and have worked for myself since my late teens. I recently realised that I'm likely unemployable in a traditional office sense, and so will need to make everything work off my own back until retirement. Things are good now, but prospects and perceptions change quickly with age, depending on your field.