Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Administration Sues Dollar General for Using Background Checks on Job Applicants
Gateway Pundit ^ | June 22, 2013 | Jim Hoft

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 ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS: banglist; dollargeneral; holderspeople; nointegrity; nojustice; nolaw; obama4criminals; obamaracist; racism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-105 next last

1 posted on 06/22/2013 2:35:08 PM PDT by Hojczyk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

General Dollar doesn’t have the IRS or Justice Dept on their payroll.

Pray for America to Wake Up


2 posted on 06/22/2013 2:38:14 PM PDT by bray (Stop tolerating beheading!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk
This stuff no longer has any meaning. The law means what they say it means. Which is to say that there is no law. If they do not like you, then you are racist and are in violation of federal statues. If they do like you, then you are entitled to big government checks because that is what the law requires.

I'm watching this trainwreck of a society and I am in awe.

3 posted on 06/22/2013 2:38:51 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

I think it’s much more racist to imply that African Americans are all criminals.


4 posted on 06/22/2013 2:39:11 PM PDT by tsowellfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

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.


5 posted on 06/22/2013 2:39:39 PM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Background checks would weed out most Democrats from consideration.


6 posted on 06/22/2013 2:40:50 PM PDT by Proud2BeRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

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.


7 posted on 06/22/2013 2:40:52 PM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin (Freedom is the freedom to discipline yourself so others don't have to do it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

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.


8 posted on 06/22/2013 2:41:13 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (Unindicted Co-conspirators: The Mainstream Media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Guidelines by commissions are now the law of the land. Laws made at the wave of a hand, anywhere, anytime for any reason.


9 posted on 06/22/2013 2:42:50 PM PDT by TADSLOS (The Event Horizon has come and gone. Buckle up and hang on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

but of course if an employee assaults or rapes a customer, Dollar General will still be sued


10 posted on 06/22/2013 2:42:52 PM PDT by faithhopecharity (()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk
Just one more issue ripe for exploiting by the next Republican candidate for President.

If we can find one with a spine.

11 posted on 06/22/2013 2:46:12 PM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Non-union companies.

Need I say more?


12 posted on 06/22/2013 2:48:16 PM PDT by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faithhopecharity
Go ahead and finish it.... for hiring a felon of assault or rape..
13 posted on 06/22/2013 2:48:24 PM PDT by eyedigress ((zOld storm chaser from the west)/ ?s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

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?


14 posted on 06/22/2013 2:49:42 PM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

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.


15 posted on 06/22/2013 2:49:42 PM PDT by umgud (2A can't survive dem majorities)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk
"It’s now unlawful to discriminate against applicants who have committed a crime."

How much more of this are the American people going to tolerate?

16 posted on 06/22/2013 2:51:37 PM PDT by Savage Beast ("'1984' is the essence of 'liberalism'." rlmorel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Counter-sue, since the gov’t conducts background checks for millions of employees and contractors.


17 posted on 06/22/2013 2:51:55 PM PDT by G Larry (Let his days be few; and let another take his office. Psalms 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk
"When the law no longer protects you from the corrupt,
but protects the corrupt from you
- you know your nation is doomed."

-Ayn Rand


18 posted on 06/22/2013 2:52:09 PM PDT by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TADSLOS
Guidelines by commissions are now the law of the land. Laws made at the wave of a hand, anywhere, anytime for any reason.

"As the Secretary shall determine" appears in Obamacare thousands of times, giving this...woman...the power to decide who lives, who dies, who suffers and how much. Nation of laws, uh huh.


19 posted on 06/22/2013 2:52:37 PM PDT by LostInBayport (When there are more people riding in the cart than there are pulling it, the cart stops moving...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: stylecouncilor

SC ping....


20 posted on 06/22/2013 2:53:30 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

21 posted on 06/22/2013 2:54:05 PM PDT by Dallas59 (Q: The worst president in US history?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Savage Beast
Are we going to get to the point en masse of telling Big Brother to pound sand.

If tens of thousands say no, we've had enough of this madness?

22 posted on 06/22/2013 2:56:33 PM PDT by oldtimer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

ALL FBI JOB CANDIDATES UNDERGO A BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION

Planned Parenthood runs a criminal background check on all volunteers.


23 posted on 06/22/2013 2:58:01 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

The best court argument is that by forcing companies to hire ex-felons, the executive branch is diminishing the authority of the judicial branch.

Already the judiciary is constrained by sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimum sentences; but this weakens them from the other direction, that criminal sentences are effectively reduced from the judges’ discretion.

Likewise it can be argued that ex-cons on parole or probation must be offered jobs in positions of authority; or even the extreme, that prison is no barrier to employment, so that prisoners can mail in resumes while incarcerated, and employers must consider them, as if they were handicapped and incapacitated at home.

This being said, if the purpose of judges is further reduced, what purpose do judges serve? Punishments can be ordered against individuals by bureaucrats, and nobody can hold it against the criminal as punishment after.


24 posted on 06/22/2013 2:58:51 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: umgud

No silly it’s their rules your playing by. Just like it is unconstitutional to drug test welfare recipients and law makers or regulators, but it’s constitutionally ok to test the folks paying for it.


25 posted on 06/22/2013 2:58:56 PM PDT by DeWalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

I’d surmise background checks for hiring is a direct violation of directive 10-289, although I could not cite you which specific clause is involved.


26 posted on 06/22/2013 2:59:28 PM PDT by C210N (When people fear government there is tyranny; when government fears people there is liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gieriscm

ping


27 posted on 06/22/2013 3:01:31 PM PDT by BCR #226 (02/07 SOT www.extremefirepower.com...The BS stops when the hammer drops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
Obama insists we hire these people?

Thug Report

28 posted on 06/22/2013 3:03:37 PM PDT by MamaDearest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
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. Fixed it for you.
29 posted on 06/22/2013 3:03:46 PM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (Both parties are trying to elect a new PEOPLE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LostInBayport

Can’t someone with paint shop superimpose Dr.Kavorkians face on the DHS secretary. It looks like a good fit.


30 posted on 06/22/2013 3:06:22 PM PDT by DeWalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Then why is a background check for firearm purchase legal?


31 posted on 06/22/2013 3:07:48 PM PDT by muir_redwoods (Don't fire until you see the blue of their helmets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

EEOC’s policy a “Catch 22.” Employers “must either hire criminals or risk an EEOC investigation and class action lawsuit.”


32 posted on 06/22/2013 3:11:07 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

>>If we can find one with a spine.

Might as well wish for one with wings, eyeballs that shoot laser beams, and a never-ending supply of delicious bacon!


33 posted on 06/22/2013 3:11:46 PM PDT by Bryanw92 (Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LostInBayport

The Ice Queen... no heart; no soul!


34 posted on 06/22/2013 3:14:21 PM PDT by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Commies love crime. It destroys society faster. I would not be surprised to find they begin waiving background checks for those who work with disabled, etc..


35 posted on 06/22/2013 3:15:01 PM PDT by sheikdetailfeather (Yuri Bezmenov (KGB Defector) - "Kick The Communists Out of Your Govt. & Don't Accept Their Goodies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsowellfan

Exactly
Solution, toss ALL minority applications into the circle file and assume they All are criminals. So no checks needed.


36 posted on 06/22/2013 3:16:19 PM PDT by DanielRedfoot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

And when the AA hires screw up, steal from you, or rape your customers will the “justice” department help you?

This is about destroying business.


37 posted on 06/22/2013 3:24:50 PM PDT by I want the USA back (If I Pi$$ed off just one liberal today my mission has been accomplished.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

The next (illogical) step will be people applying for jobs and volunteering their record.That will be deemed as giving themselves an unfair advantage and also outlawed. This can get pretty stupid pretty fast.


38 posted on 06/22/2013 3:27:43 PM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

It looks like Dollar General hasn’t been hiring enough of Holder’s “people” with criminal records.


39 posted on 06/22/2013 3:28:43 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (McCain and "The Flake" have got to go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin

Your tag line is the best that I have seen in a long time!

Good stuff there.

Join a Gun Club and you can bet there will be a background check. The blacks have given the word “discriminate” a negative meaning. Those who are indiscriminate, I do not care to associate with.


40 posted on 06/22/2013 3:31:47 PM PDT by BatGuano (You don't think I'd go into combat with loose change in my pocket, do ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LostInBayport

That is one mean looking bitch.


41 posted on 06/22/2013 3:33:25 PM PDT by BatGuano (You don't think I'd go into combat with loose change in my pocket, do ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BatGuano

That is one worthless looking subhuman.


42 posted on 06/22/2013 3:37:49 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

“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.”

In other words, it’s assumed most black applicants have felony convictions so there’s no reason to check.

What a low opinion this “Just Us” department has of the people they claim to be helping.


43 posted on 06/22/2013 3:40:51 PM PDT by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Instead of government spending so much money and time on educating the people on their “rights” to welfare, food stamps, cheap housing, etc., they should simply point out that criminal behavior, no matter how petty, will follow them for the rest of their lives.
Dollar General has a very small profit margin (yes they really expect to make a profit) so they must trust those who work for them. Who would leave a burglar in charge of the cash register?


44 posted on 06/22/2013 3:47:29 PM PDT by BatGuano (You don't think I'd go into combat with loose change in my pocket, do ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

45 posted on 06/22/2013 3:53:00 PM PDT by LyinLibs (If victims of islam were more "islamophobic," maybe they'd still be alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

The point of this exercise:

Punish companies 1.) that are not unionized, and 2.) in the South.


46 posted on 06/22/2013 3:55:33 PM PDT by spodefly (This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy; Old Sarge
“This stuff no longer has any meaning. The law means what they say it means. Which is to say that there is no law. If they do not like you, then you are racist and are in violation of federal statues. If they do like you, then you are entitled to big government checks because that is what the law requires. I'm watching this trainwreck of a society and I am in awe.”

I copied your whole post because it is so true it needed to be said again. I watch TV news, both Fox and CNN, and read news and study other subjects all day. I am a multitask person.

Every day I read/see exactly what you wrote and every day it's a new restriction or destruction of our rights in every facet of our life. When I wake up, I wonder what right will be trampled on today.

I am the embodiment of every single attribute Hussein hates and I don't use the hate word very often but it fits here.

Plus, I'm older and he “hates” older people as we are merely taking up space. Well, I don't just take up space, I write prepper articles so people can prepare and he “hates” that, too.

There are some Freepers who like me, so I'm sure he “hates” them, too, for supporting what I do.

Golly, gee, Hussein doesn't like me - a pox on Hussein, I don't care.

47 posted on 06/22/2013 3:58:11 PM PDT by Marcella (Prepping can save your life today. I am a Christian, not a Muslim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods
Then why is a background check for firearm purchase legal?

So the solution is to make gun ownership a requirement of the job and if they can't pass that background check, they don't get hired.

Simple.

48 posted on 06/22/2013 4:01:28 PM PDT by Wingy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Wingy

Beautiful, Fu#@*&g Beautiful!


49 posted on 06/22/2013 4:06:37 PM PDT by BatGuano (You don't think I'd go into combat with loose change in my pocket, do ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin

And hospitals would no longer be able to do checks. Which is a violation in and of itself. I call BS.


50 posted on 06/22/2013 4:14:25 PM PDT by j_guru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-105 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson