but protects the corrupt from you
- you know your nation is doomed."
-Ayn Rand
Posted on 06/22/2013 2:35:08 PM PDT by Hojczyk
The Obama Administration sued Dollar General for using background checks on job applications because it’s racist. It’s now unlawful to discriminate against applicants who have committed a crime.
The Obama administration is suing Dollar General and a BMW facility in South Carolina for the alleged unfair use of criminal background checks for job applicants, months after warning companies about how such screenings can discriminate against African Americas.
The suits were filed June 11 by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which last year issued new guidelines that cautioned against rejecting minority applicants who have committed a crime and recommended businesses eliminate policies that “exclude people from employment based on a criminal record.”
The suits have re-ignited concerns over such issues as potential federal overreach, the overlap of state and federal law and companies losing their rights to protect customers, workers and assets while trying to adhere to fair hiring practices.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
General Dollar doesn’t have the IRS or Justice Dept on their payroll.
Pray for America to Wake Up
I'm watching this trainwreck of a society and I am in awe.
I think it’s much more racist to imply that African Americans are all criminals.
Generally....the most stupid thing that a small business can do....is simply hire someone for a responsible job involving money and the cash register....without checking the guy’s background. Course, no one in the EEOC has ever run a business...so they wouldn’t understand that.
Background checks would weed out most Democrats from consideration.
This article is a lie. Businesses HAVE to be able to do background checks prior to employment. If this is actually taking place and the government wins, then they have to drop background checks for schoolteachers. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
This should be laughed out of court. After all, how many felons does the Federal gubermint employ? Oh, wait. That would be the Cabinet. Nevermind.
Guidelines by commissions are now the law of the land. Laws made at the wave of a hand, anywhere, anytime for any reason.
but of course if an employee assaults or rapes a customer, Dollar General will still be sued
If we can find one with a spine.
Non-union companies.
Need I say more?
There have been several attempts at this. At one point the government didn’t want background checks until after all the interviews. The reasoning was that “qualified” candidates were not even getting the interviews because they had criminal records. If a candidate is qualified then you find out he has a criminal record you are supposed to evaluate what impact that might have. For example, he was sentenced to five years for assault. But he could run your register and count your receipts because that’s not going to involve assault. The liberal thinking is, this poor guy should not suffer for one bad decision. He is, after all, paid in full. He is no different now than anybody who does not have a record.
My own experience is that ex-criminals are still criminals they just haven’t been caught at it. Poor decision making is part of who they are. Granted, some people change. But do you want to risk your business on it when there are thousands of honest people who have kept their nose clean vying for the same job?
If you are a truck driver, train engineer, boat captain, pilot, etc. you will have to have a fairly clean record and pass an FBI background check to transport hazardous materials. Maybe somebody needs to sue the feds.
How much more of this are the American people going to tolerate?
Counter-sue, since the gov’t conducts background checks for millions of employees and contractors.
-Ayn Rand
SC ping....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.