Nanker Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 Three times I was in a jury pool and during voir dire I was asked by the judge, "What bumper stickers do you have on your car." My answer was easy. "None." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Christ Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 According to who? What law are you referring to? you are not being serious are you? religion is another one. I as well as everyone know it doesn't matter though. sheesh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 In Texas its probably okay, because most of the people there can't read anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 you are not being serious are you? religion is another one. I as well as everyone know it doesn't matter though. sheesh Yes, I'm quite serious. When did 'political beliefs' become a protected class? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 Yes, I'm quite serious. When did 'political beliefs' become a protected class? Since the 70s... http://www.hreonline.com/HRE/story.jsp?storyId=533344591 http://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/29657/beware-liability-if-no-hire-decision-was-based-on-politics "Wagner sued the dean, who lost. The court said no qualified immunity was available because the law clearly stated political affiliation or beliefs cannot be part of the hiring decision for public employers. (Wagner v. Jones, No. 10-2588, 8th Cir., 2011)" A good thread on the subject: http://www.linkedin.com/answers/law-legal/employment-labor-law/LAW_ELW/449714-9356514 Looks like the Supreme Court decision affects only public employees (does that mean government? Or public traded? Not sure...), but some states specifically spell it out as well. I know when I've taken classes on how to interview and hire employees that they've all said to not make a decision based on political affiliation - why open that can of worms? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 The law is one thing, but that doesnt mean political bias cant affect your job. You work for a hard core left or right leaning guy and you swing the other way.....you trust him to be on the up and up next time promotion time comes around? I dont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv's Neighbor Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 I actually don't - I think bumper stickers are lame... But it's curious to see how many people are willing to break the law because of a bumper sticker. (I do have a small Buffalo Bills window cling on my rear window... Is that lame? ) I have one of those too, but I'm looking for my razor blade right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Since the 70s... http://www.hreonline...oryId=533344591 http://www.businessm...sed-on-politics "Wagner sued the dean, who lost. The court said no qualified immunity was available because the law clearly stated political affiliation or beliefs cannot be part of the hiring decision for public employers. (Wagner v. Jones, No. 10-2588, 8th Cir., 2011)" A good thread on the subject: http://www.linkedin..../449714-9356514 Looks like the Supreme Court decision affects only public employees (does that mean government? Or public traded? Not sure...), but some states specifically spell it out as well. I know when I've taken classes on how to interview and hire employees that they've all said to not make a decision based on political affiliation - why open that can of worms? Your evidence doesn't back up your conclusion on several points. 1. Not sure where you are getting the '70s reference from; the only reference to that decade I saw is from one poster who refered to one SC case in the '70s stating that it wasn't legal to fire a public employee for political beliefs. Public employee means government employee. Firing someone is not the same thing as choosing to not hire them. Neither of these situations apply to the OP (or to hiring practices in general). 2. The other example you provided was from 2009 and also involved a public entity and application of state law to a specific set of circumstance. Again, not exactly a precedent setting case, espeically outside of Iowa and outside the realm of government employees. The pertinent paragraph in the first link is this one: An employee's or job candidate's political leanings are not considered protected free speech in the employment context at private-sector organizations in all but a handful of states (see this list), where it's theoretically legal to refuse to hire or fire someone whose affiliation may rankle the powers that be (so long as the person is not a member of a protected class). So it's not a protected class and therefore not illegal in all but a small handful of states. Therefore the accusation that the OP broke the law is false. That said, of course it's not something you're going to ask on an interview, but it's hardly the equivalent of rejecting someone based on race or gender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 So it's not a protected class and therefore not illegal in all but a small handful of states. Therefore the accusation that the OP broke the law is false. That said, of course it's not something you're going to ask on an interview, but it's hardly the equivalent of rejecting someone based on race or gender. Just because it's not a protected class doesn't mean you won't still lose the lawsuit. Did you read the opening paragraph on the HR site? "The "lesson" for private-sector companies from a recent appeals-court ruling concerning a woman who contends she was rejected for a law-school job because of her conservative political beliefs, experts say, is: Make sure your reasons are valid and properly documented when you depart from standard operating procedure in making a hiring decision." Having a kid or being married isn't a "protected class" either, but it's illegal to make hiring decisions based on that -- heck, it's illegal to even ASK if someone is married or has kids during an interview. http://voices.yahoo.com/illegal-job-interview-questions-handle-807099.html?cat=3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Just because it's not a protected class doesn't mean you won't still lose the lawsuit. Did you read the opening paragraph on the HR site? "The "lesson" for private-sector companies from a recent appeals-court ruling concerning a woman who contends she was rejected for a law-school job because of her conservative political beliefs, experts say, is: Make sure your reasons are valid and properly documented when you depart from standard operating procedure in making a hiring decision." Having a kid or being married isn't a "protected class" either, but it's illegal to make hiring decisions based on that -- heck, it's illegal to even ASK if someone is married or has kids during an interview. http://voices.yahoo....7099.html?cat=3 You can ALWAYS lose a lawsuit so of course an HR website is going to tell you 'be careful' and I'm not suggesting that isn't good advice. But your assertion that the OP broke the law is flat out wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Ummm... guys? Where did GBID say in their post they wouldn't hire the person because of the bumper stickers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Ummm... guys? Where did GBID say in their post they wouldn't hire the person because of the bumper stickers? Because he didn't say he hired them. Just using a little PPP logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Ummm... guys? Where did GBID say in their post they wouldn't hire the person because of the bumper stickers? He didn't specifically say that - but Clippers did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Because he didn't say he hired them. Just using a little PPP logic. This ain't PPP, [spartans reference] This ! Is! OTW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 yet another good reason to never put a bumper sticker on your car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts