Well most of the American companies do have an HR department, a CEO and of course owners/shareholders.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sagewo...g-private-public-company-trends/#5a62aa072bab excerpt: http://employeeissues.com/nepotism.htm excerpt:
Oh, FFS. Name? Really??? Hello Candidate #2, please have a seat, if that falls within your acceptable action realm today. May I offer you a beverage Candidate #2? Is it OK if I refer to you as C2 for expediency sake? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that violated your preference for non-slang personal identifiers. So, since we cannot discuss your past employment, how much you made at any past employment, validate your legal position for employment, or discuss your abilities to perform the position, may we provide you with a desk in the upper management division and pay all your bills for you so you may enjoy life to your satisfaction? Wonderful. Full medical coverage, food allowance, vehicle allowance and a company credit card with no verification requirements will be waiting for you at your desk.
There is no point in removing the others if you can be identified by gender and race by your name. Hung Lo Dong is a pretty good indicator or race just as Jessica is a dead giveaway for gender. You can get your name back afterwards but during the application process ONLY merit should be considered.
I would think the fact that they were born in the US qualified them for immediate full recognition, as they were not naturalized citizens of any other countries?
Such strong words against what you term as a nationalist org. How do you feel about nationalist movements across Europe? Equally negative?
Another poll presenting a false dichotomy. If you add qualifiers, it's no longer a yes/no question. There are plenty more reasons why someone would select yes or no.
By all means. Please identify yourself as a drongo so I can choose a more socially adept employee. Or if you are applying for a job at the BBC, go for the full drongo. Otherwise you won't get it. It doesn't hurt if you want to be trans or whatever. It's not a big deal. But it's no great asset either. It's a small negative that you are not socially well adjusted and in jobs that involve meeting people front of house, you just ruled yourself out just as much as the punk with the orange mohican did. Suggestion: In a first impression scenario, lead with your strengths and not with your flaws.
By all means. Please identify yourself as a Jew (or Muslim) so I can choose a more socially adept employee. Or if you are applying for a job at the BBC, go for the full Jew(or Muslim) . Otherwise you won't get it. It doesn't hurt if you want to be Jewish (or Islamic) or whatever. It's not a big deal. But it's no great asset either. It's a small negative that you are not socially well adjusted and in jobs that involve meeting people front of house, you just ruled yourself out just as much as the punk with the orange mohican did. Suggestion: In a first impression scenario, lead with your strengths and not with your flaws. Yeah, it's funny how when you change it to a religion, it sounds like discrimination. Oh wait, my mistake, it sounded like discrimination before.
It is discrimination. Do you feel better now? The purpose of a job interview is to discriminate between the candidates. Equally I could exchange the words, retard and genius, competent and incompetent, suitable and unsuitable. It will still be discrimination. If the job being offered is a job in the Church of England, Jew and Muslims need not apply or if they do, might not want to mention this on their application. Put your front foot forward.
There is a huge difference between not choosing someone for who they are versus what they can do. How do you know a trans person can't interact with the public? How do you know they won't be accepted? Saying that you won't hire a trans person because you think that you they will not be accepted by your customers is no different that saying you won't hire a Jew (or a black person) because they will not be accepted by your customers, but you are right, it is discrimination, and it is wrong. But you've known that it was discrimination before you posted it as you used the slang "drongo" which I found out means "idiot" so you already have preconceived notions of what a trans person can or cannot do. And using a very specific scenario, which would be so rare, that it would almost be never seen, is very poor debating.
It should be legal as long as it is legal for an employer to fire you for lying on your application or resume. BTW, I self identify as a Pacific Islander gay woman with an MD from Johns Hopkins, a law degree from Yale, and a PhD in astrophysics from MIT. Can I be your accountant? I also know how to tend bar.
I self identify as a teenage school girl . . . After the incident in the swimming baths the police see it differently
In the UK, you can be prosecuted under the Fraud Act 2006 if you lie on your CV and get the job. People have been jailed for doing this. http://www.mancunianmatters.co.uk/content/160970687-legal-eagle-can-you-go-prison-lying-your-cv
I'm not sure I agree that you should be jailed (or gaoled) for lying on a resume, but it should be an automatic firing and payback all or part of what you have been paid to date. We have way too many people in jail as it is in the US.
I would go with that fraud is fraud. So if you lied and got the $60,000 a year job or you lied to get the $60,000 loan off the bank, it's just fraudulent.
So letting people choose their gender trumps what the nature does? What about things other than gender? I identify as a millionaire. When you get the check ready, I'll give you an address where you can send it.