Skip to comments.EEOC says using criminal background checks on new hires might be racist
Posted on 02/16/2013 11:12:36 AM PST by prplhze2000
EEOC now considers the widespread use of criminal background checks to hire employees as having a "disparate impact" on minorities. Going to harass employers more over them.
The EEOC is the most racist hate group out there. Be careful when dealing with those racists.
This is ABSURD.
Sure some jobs you might or might not want to take into account certain qualifications, but to bar the information is beyond ridiculous.
No go. Period.
Wonder if the EEOC could be held responsible?
“This is going on your permanent record” apparently doesn’t mean much anymore.
Ask these job applicants why they were concerned about the election eve release of information about GW Bush’s arrest for a DWI charge decades prior to his applying for the job as POTUS?
It measurably cost Bush votes and he only lost the “Al Gore ‘I SHOULD BE YOR’ PRESIDENT!!’ Popular Vote” by 0.51% (half a percent).
Sorry, but this crap is already here. You cannot ask questions about arrest records, only felonies. Of course, most bad folks plea most of their convictions to lesser offenses. Then you end up hiring someone that cannot get a clearance or enter a secured facility. Just a bunch of crap. This is why the unemployment rate is more than 10% in DC. About 20% to 30% are functinally unemployable for any kind of cleared position or position that requires rudimental communication skills or college.
Your post is what the EOOC wants to change: They want felons to get clearances and for businesses to lower their standards to the typical education level of a black or hispanic high-school dropout.
Of course, those same EEOC racists will demand proper and competent service when they engage a business in their personal lives, but God help businesses if they have standards to try to obtain that level of service.
A service plumber can go to a 10 million dollar home and be given a list of things that need to be done, and told that there is coffee and cookies in the kitchen and to lock the door when he leaves. A background check isn’t just to stop the guys who will blatantly steal, but also one who might do impulse stealing, pilfering.
Aside from the normal crime problems of casing a home and other serious burglar issues, a home like that has many normal trinkets just laying around like any other house does, Rolex watches, valuable knick knacks, cool collectibles, etc, it would be nice to be able to know who you are hiring before sending your guy to people’s homes.
America has millions of service people sent into the homes, the homes where the women and children live.
Again, the Left admits that mostly blacks commit crime. We need to keep pointing this out.
I don’t have a problem with barring arrests. In my state, disorderly conduct is the BS charge the cops use when they can’t think of anything else. Why should you be penalized when you are never convicted?
Betcha the EEOC feels the same way about universal background checks for buying firearms. You watch—as soon as it’s made mandatory, the government will start issuing waivers for certain favored minorities.
Out of say 50 applications, I'd screen them down to the top ten applications for the position I was looking for and check their "local criminal history" on the county jail websites
Amazing what you would find...
True, but you can tell them:
"We as company policy run criminal background checks after we hire someone and do I need to know anything that would prevent us from permanently hiring you if we decide to offer you a position"...You will be on a 90 probation period...
"I simply do not want to waste your job searching time"...
Ha! THEY took care of the problem before it was diagnosed as a problem.
Those douches in DC have ruined this economy to such an extent, along with our business, that we’re no longer hiring any one.
This policy is a direct effort to bring the large number of black criminals into the new master class. One must give them jobs, allow them to vote and worse. By bringing in new members of the conquering class that class further consolidates its ongoing conquest.
"We actively encourage all employees to be voters -- the freedom we enjoy in this country says we need every voice at election time."
When the EEOC says "that's discrimination" one just needs to point to the Department of Justice and say "no, it can't be discrimination because the DoJ says every eligible person needs to be able to register to vote. That means if they want to work at our company they need to do their civic duty. If they don't register, that's the decision of the individual."
For those people who don't register to vote to avoid jury duty, the company should have a policy of supporting the employee during any jury duty call.
Time to fight fire with fire.
They sure have changed.