Discussion in 'Lounge' started by lklawson, Jul 31, 2015.

  1. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Listening to a podcast while driving I heard a gentleman being interviewed saying that hires EXCLUSIVELY veterans. Only veterans. Nothing except veterans. While that seems very laudable to me it seems to me that it may be, legally, considered discrimination is hiring.

    While I appreciate his desire to do something good for vets, which he is one himself, perhaps this is opening himself up to a lawsuit. What do you think?

    Peace favor your sword (mobile)
  2. Lawyers can put a spin on anything. And, you can sue anyone for anything...doesn't mean you'll win, and of course, the lawyers are more than happy to take you money...
    And, I do praise the guy for hiring vets!

  3. SWAGA

    SWAGA No longer broke... Lifetime Supporter

    What business is it?
    Veteran's benefit organization?
  4. MaryB

    MaryB Supporting Member

    I wuld think the business type might come into play. If it is a security company I could see only vets....
  5. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    It's not discrimination. There isn't anything in the labor laws to prohibit employers from hiring vets only. It only says they can't refuse to hire someone for race, religion, gender, marital status, disability, etc

    It's perfectly legal to be denied employment for having bad credit.
  6. talon

    talon the banned wagon

    Simply the "best qualified for the position" was hired if it comes down to it.
  7. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Moving company.

    Peace favor your sword (mobile)
  8. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    I think that might be hard to defend. Like I said, I personally don't have any problem with it, it just strikes me as potentially opening himself up.

    Peace favor your sword (mobile)
  9. Rerun

    Rerun Supporting Member

    No more so than a company requiring a four or six year degree...


  10. talon

    talon the banned wagon

    Unless it was some position that required specialized degrees that the vet didn't have and another candidate did, its the employers decision to deem someone more or less qualified. How would that be hard to defend?
  11. When I got laid off on Virginia every interview I got with a company mentioned that they preferred to hire veterans. It was very frustrating. But I also think we should encourage people to hire vets.
    Had to move back to PA to get an interview where they didn't ask if I left any service off my resumes.
    And now as in looking for a second job I see a fee "veterans preferred" at the bottom of applications.

    It may not legally be listed as a thing you can be discriminatory for. But i feel it fits the definition
  12. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Any experience with moving as a professional or even as an amateur would automatically trump experience in the military because, no matter how beneficial to character one believes military training is, it doesn't trump actual experience in the field. That would negate the "most qualified candidate" claim.

    Peace favor your sword (mobile)
  13. I think its crap and I have missed out on jobs because the other person is a vet. V

    I have even been an in-place employee and the new manager got rid of us (15 people) to replace us with less qualified vets.
  14. I suppose that would depend on the type of job. I mean, I won't be applying for a moving company. Bit if I went out and tried to get a job with L3, SpaceX (exploring that one currently), or Dish, chances are once they saw my AFSC and list of assignments, they'd be jumping at it, since most of the companies are somewhat familiar with that stuff and will see the value of both the military experience AND the job experience.
    Hell, when I Was at a job fair at the Nutter Center, a guy from AFSPC saw my space wings and literally said, "You, on the spot interview, now."
    I was there for my wife, so I politely declined, buy dayum, talk about eager.
  15. talon

    talon the banned wagon

    I again disagree. Most every E1-E3 has done mess duty or worked supply or something to the effect of actual experience for a moving company. Face it, lift box onto truck, dont break stuff in box isnt exactly a position that requires a degree in rocket science.
    "Ive lifted more boxes than you" isnt really a "more experienced" qualification.
  16. talon

    talon the banned wagon

    Yea, those [email protected]$tard vets!! How dare anyone give them preferential treatment for putting thier lives on the line for your freedom. Need a job? Join the service, all able bodied men should for at least one tour of duty.
  17. Well said!
  18. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    So people with ADHD, who can't join because the take daily meds, should be discriminated against? And pacifists? Or any of a dozen other possibilities?

    Peace favor your sword (mobile)
  19. talon

    talon the banned wagon

    If the hiring party feels time in service makes you better qualified its not discrmination.
    And all those reasons (other than pansy, i mean pacifist) are legitimate reasons that can be held against you and your ability to do the job as needed, so still its not discrimination if your overlooked for someone else.

    Pacifist.....isnt that French for pu$$y?
  20. SWAGA

    SWAGA No longer broke... Lifetime Supporter

    A buddy of mine spend 4 years with the USMC.......
    He spend 4 years in the paper push department of the motor pool walking around with a clipboard under his arm looking busy.
    His exact words, not mine.
    Not the type of 'veteran' that I'd like to see hired instead of me.