Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Perhaps it's our own modern-day spin on 1930's Germany's 'perfect race'?
Could we see signs in the windows (or nowadays, on the websites): we only hire perfect people here, no fatty's. No smokers. No meat eaters. No drinkers. And then after that: we only hire people who think like we do. No traditionalists. No people who think for themselves. Etc... Ultimately, we hire only drones who do everything in their personal lives just as we think they should.
Although it may represent an erosion of liberty, perhaps more alarming is that it represents an erosion of the human mind.
Employers and liberty have nothing to do with each other. A man who pays you to do a job has a right to expect that you can and will do it efficiently, without disrupting the workplace. It might be a serious breach of the constitution to use it to compel employers to conduct themselves in ways that are not in the interests of their business. We may have already seriously overstepped the bounds.
Constitutionally, only the government is restrained from infringing on your rights. or aiding or abetting such infringements. You do not have freedom of speech in the workplace, nor the right to bear arms, if exercising that right harms your employers interests.
Just because you have a job does not give you the "liberty" to conduct yourself as you please on the jobsite. Nor to harm, the interests of the person who pays you to do what he tells you to do.
Obviously, there is a public interest in legislation that limits the abuse of employees by their bosses. But this should not go so far as to restrict the employers right to give hiring priority to fit and suitable job candidates.
(In the future, when composing a new thread, please comply with the guideline request that your title reflect the subject matter.)
well you havent been concerned so far and for eons people use theior own prejudices to not hire someone, not based on merit but personality, looks or other distracting factors.
Sexual orientations not protected so in many occasions people can indeed be fired for not opting for the popular choice.... which ever that is.
You have lkittle protection in a work place and nothing is new there it has nothing to do with the Constitution or any other aspect... when it copmes down to it it is you and the person hiring. Seldom can you prove any wrong doing.
The people who are want to control other peoples lives knew that smokers would be an easy target to start with to start the ball rolling down that slippery slope of anarchy.
People should have ,but didn't, known that if they didn't protect smokers rights they soon wouldn't have any themselves. So it always is.
The people who are want to control other peoples lives knew that smokers would be an easy target to start with to start the ball rolling down that slippery slope of anarchy.
The people who want to control other people's lives...are the very same people who just want to save themselves some money.
that's all it is about, not lifestyle or health, but cold hard cash.
it's not a slippery slope to anarchy though.
it's just damn evil for the all mighty dollar..
If you wish to stand up against the evil of the almighty dollar, defending the workplace rights of fat people is surely one of the most ineffective places to start your campaign.
No....no it is not ok. Because one smokes, is overweight etc....does not dictate that they would be poor employees. This is just yet another of abuse from so-called corporate America.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.