Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on lemmy.world

17 replies

pipe
lemmy.world

I've done a bit of hiring and this won't pass the legal bar (even asking what town someone lives in can be evidence of intentionally trying to find out if the candidate is of "the right stock"), but I also rather like envisioning a comedy scene of someone trying to use toilets as a sneaky determinant πŸ˜† Very Monty Python.

18
otacon239reply
lemmy.world

Income isn’t a protected class. Is there something else that makes this illegal?

6
pipereply

It is just dicey, because income can be related to racial factors. Poor areas in many cities are often overwhelmingly non-white. It's something HR doesn't want to touch with a ten-foot pole.

15

It can construed as a side step around the protected classes. Which means it could open up the opportunity to be sued. Since there are so very many lawsuits on the books about this, there is a likelihood that there is a precedent that would hurt someone who tried to use this side stepping idea. So most (wise) employers would avoid doing this to avoid the risk. It isn't black and white.

2

I wonder if answering "I don't know, I haven't checked" would count as:

  • "Why is this bastard even trying to apply for a job when they can't even count the number of toilets in their house?"
  • "Probably trying to dodge the question, not good."
  • "Homeless motherfucker? REJECTED!"
7
pipereply

I'll have you know it was a utility sink so it doesn't count!! πŸ™ƒ

5

Also helps figure out how much time they might spend pooping on company time. Someone without any toilets is gonna fully unload at work.

5

Makes sense. We had three growing up and only one now and I'm way worse off now than as a kid.

4

They're building apartments now with more toilets than bedrooms in some places.

3

You reached the end