If we could only give them high paid office jobs (ala Marie Harf)...
Posted on 08/11/2015 2:44:46 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
GREER, S.C. —A federal judge won't dismiss a lawsuit accusing BMW Manufacturing Co. of discriminating against black job candidates with a job screening policy at its Greer manufacturing facility.
U.S. District Judge Henry M. Herlong Jr. denied BMW's motion for summary judgment in the suit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
In 2013, the EEOC accused BMW of violating former employees' civil rights by using criminal background checks with a disproportionate effect on black employees and applicants.
(Excerpt) Read more at wyff4.com ...
Jessie Jackass for sure on this one. The Greenville area is where he was born...
“be”. ...be racers.
P.O.S. autocorrect
... that’s what we were told about Obama, the magic negro, the great unifier, the post racism prince of rappers and needless to say the messiah with a nobel prize....
... what a crock of shit.
But America swallowed it;.
Seems like a rather racist statement made by the EEOC.
No, no, no! No one should discriminate against someone who is black with a criminal record. If the person is white, feel free to hold the criminal record against him.
OH, of course. What was I thinking?
I can tell that nobody who has posted so far has read the article.
From the article, 88 people had been working at the plant already. One of them for 12 years and one for 14 years. When the service provider they worked for was terminated, a background check was made of the 88 people who had been already working at BMW (for re-employment at the same job at the same facility). 70 of the 88 people were terminated even though they had already been working there for years.
I think that BMW will have a hard time explaining why they were OK for 14 years but suddenly were dangerous.
Discrimination, racially? Really?
How many whites with criminal records have they hired? That would be the proof they need. < /sarc >
TRUTH; it's the new HATE SPEECH.
Reading the excerpt seems to indicate that job CANDIDATES were involved, not (recent prior) employees.
You are a dumb ass. Next time you get on a Boeing air craft know this. Everyone one of us that have worked there have had a back ground check and a piss test. You can not pull over to a cloud to check out the plain in flight.
You misunderstood TC’s reply. It was a question. You owe her an apology.
“This is the government’s contention that criminal background checks should not be performed on prospective job applicants.”
Obviously it isn’t done on politicians and that has worked out well. ;-)
This is the government’s contention that criminal background checks should not be performed on prospective job applicants.
...
Does the same rule apply for those that work at the White House or for legislators?
It was indeed a question - rhetorical question - in response to post #2, which began, “No one should discriminate ...”.
I am not a candidate for office, so I won’t insist on or expect an apology, even for a ruder than average reply. “Your post was stupid,” would have been nicer, rather than anything starting with, “You are ...”.
“Racist” is someone winning an argument with a liberal.
Whoa. That was uncalled for.
I worked for a company that was bought out and the new owners required criminal background checks, causing several employees to lose their jobs, some after quite a few years.
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.