4 ms·

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 reme

by 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.

by dvt 3y ago

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.