Obama Proposes Adding ‘Unemployed’ to Protected Status

New York Times ^ | September 26, 2011 | ROBERT PEAR

[reaganaut1]

President Obama has not been particularly successful in fostering the creation of jobs. But he thinks he has found a way to pry open doors in the workplace for many of the unemployed, especially those who have been out of work for a long time.

Mr. Obama’s jobs bill would prohibit employers from discriminating against job applicants because they are unemployed.

Under the proposal, it would be “an unlawful employment practice” if a business with 15 or more employees refused to hire a person “because of the individual’s status as unemployed.”

Unsuccessful job applicants could sue and recover damages for violations, just like when an employer discriminates on the basis of a person’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

White House officials see discrimination against the unemployed as a serious problem. In a radio interview last month, Mr. Obama said such discrimination made “absolutely no sense,” especially at a time when many people, through no fault of their own, had been laid off.

Mr. Obama’s proposal would also prohibit employment agencies and Web sites from carrying advertisements for job openings that exclude people who are unemployed. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has received reports of such advertisements but does not have data to show how common they are.

Republicans and some employers criticized the White House proposal. They said that discrimination was not common and that the proposed remedy could expose employers to a barrage of lawsuits.

“We do not see a need for it,” said Michael J. Eastman, executive director of labor law policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Already, Mr. Eastman said, the Civil Rights Act outlaws employment practices that have “a disparate impact on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin,”

[algernonpj]

I honestly believe that Engineers need to unionize.

What other profession has it’s own Visa category to keep wagers low? (H-1B Visa) You don’t see Visa’s for Medical Doctors, or any other white collar profession.

We are skilled, we are educated, we are dedicated - and we are being sold down the river.

Yes we are being sold down the river by traitors with R's and D's after their names.

The whole country has been sold down the river! Whatever you do, white collar or blue collar, there is a guest workers visa to replace you with cheaper labor that frequently pays no or partial taxes. Imagine what you could work for if you got to pay no or partial taxes!

I suspect the reason technical professionals were hit by guest worker visas first is that it is a relative small number of middle class professionals who made a decent living but were also some what independent individuals who were less likely to form a union.

The Most Generous Nation in the World... at Giving Jobs Away lists all the visas available as of the end of 2009. IIRC, more have been added on since then. NOTE: part of the reason 125,000 new legal workers are brought into the US each month during a time of record unemployment and underemployment is these visas being built into 'free trade' agreements which are enforced by the WTO.



IMHO globalists are nothing more than communists in business suits bent upon establishing a NWO ruled by unelected bureaucrats. Before this can be achieved that pesky US middle class must be put in its place and made dependent upon the government. After aggressive off-shoring of manufacturing began in the 1970's and 1980's the technical professionals began to be hit by guest worker visas.

/end rant

[schu]

Go ahead and tar good people with that brush, but remember that sooner or later you will also be older and get to experience the smirks on the faces of interviewers young enough to be our kids.

Thanks for the note, but I am living it being 55 and owning a small staffing company. I am simply making generalizations that are consistent with my extensive experience and the experience of others. There are always exceptions, but these are a small percent of the total.

schu

[foxfield]

Are businesses now prohibited from asking for a résumé?

Kind of like the "no documentation" home loans.

[globelamp]

Sweet - making it legally more risky to hire is sure to boost hiring, Thanks Mr. Obama! Not to mention this is yet another intrusion into an area where the government has no business poking its nose.

Note that this makes it especially risky to interview people (or even request resumes from those) who are unemployed.

Brilliant! Better to just silently fill the position without a public recruitment process - lessens the risk of a lawsuit, after all.