No Greg, you are wrong about discrimination.
Nope not wrong, the use of the words you are using are ... by the way.
There are some types of discrimination that have been made illegal, most types are not.
OK so let's see ...
you judge the person's ability to do the job by the color of their skin - is that right?
You judge the person's ability to do the job by their gender - it that right?
You judge the person's ability to do the job by the way they are dressed - is that right?
You judge the person's ability to do the job by their age - is that right?
Everything that I asked there is done by seeing the person and using either stereo types or preconceived notions about the person who is applying. Most of them are types of discrimination that exists and the laws are made to make it an equal playing field in our country. I know there are others, people don't like them Italians so someone with an Italian name may be ignored for a job or told to look elsewhere but I have not seen a law that prevents that, have you?
Now, I have little doubt that our government would LOVE to expand the list of "bad discrimination" so they could force employers to hire people that do not meet the needs of the company. I mean, after all, congress has a MUCH better idea of who Bass Pro needs working for them than Bass Pro does.
Well I guess that the company wants to have white hick looking people to sell their products, it is their right to do so and maybe they can justify it but on the other hand, you and others seem to put a political spin on the issue without reading the actual issues and more importantly siding with the idiot HR VP. The issue isn't really the discrimination part, it is the investigation part and how Pro Bass people treated employees who were witness to the problems - a very bad thing. It goes to the credibility of the HR VP and others who has a hand in destroying evidence while it was being investigated. No matter if you side with the idiots who run the business based on your sportsman kinship or because you think it is an attack by the Obama administration to destroy hunting and all that, the real problem is that you are condoning everything they did so far including the discrimination which is the least of the issues involved.
Just as congress has a MUCH better idea about what people should be paid than business owners do.
Well that's a completely different subject and has zero to do with the subject.
Any employer that is NOT discriminating in there hiring practices will not be in business long.
What?!? Did I step back into 1917 in the south?
Any person who is NOT discriminating in their lives are likely to end up in trouble.
WOW!
OK I guess if that's the way you want to think, you have that right but see Layout, I can't and fought against this BS way of thinking. I thought that went out in the 1960's when people actually realized that people who were different were not like Martians.
I remember being in Kentucky back in the 80's when a Arby's just hired their first black person and the reaction to that was understandable but rather mind blowing. Here are people who refused to even step in the store because they felt it was wrong to hire anyone black person and this was in a county that was "dry". It was sad, really sad to see that reaction but hell it was a way of life for them.
A GOOD example of not using proper discrimination properly is the housing mess. We USED to discriminate on the basis of being able to pay back a mortgage. The results of not discriminating have cost us billions.
Well you are twisting something up there.
The discrimnation you are talking about is not based on the skin color nor gender or anything else, it is a financial decision based on risks which is a completely different thing altogether. If I don't like the way you look, as an individual, I can say no but as a company who is incorporated, with lots of employees, I can't.
