If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Times)   Road to Idiocracy: EEOC says High School Diploma requirement might violate Americans with Disabilities Act   (washingtontimes.com) divider line 128
    More: Asinine, Americans with Disabilities Act, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, high school diploma, Americans, force of law, reasonable accommodation, ADA, high schools  
•       •       •

7950 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Jan 2012 at 1:51 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



128 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-02 01:48:03 PM
You talk like a f^g and your sh*t's all retarded.
 
2012-01-02 01:52:12 PM
It's just a goddamned piece of paper.
 
2012-01-02 01:52:49 PM
What is this I don't even
 
2012-01-02 01:53:24 PM
Ding! Fries are done
 
2012-01-02 01:53:53 PM
There are certain things that need to be left up to the committee of people who aren't stupid. This decision should lay with them.
 
2012-01-02 01:54:54 PM
If people aren't book smart, they're not stupid... they're learning disabled. And why should employers be able to eliminate a candidate for a job because of their disability?
 
2012-01-02 01:55:08 PM
Coming soon...EEOC says that requiring an MD or PhD to work as a doctor might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Farking government.
 
2012-01-02 01:55:10 PM
So basically if you don't have a high school diploma you're disabled?

Got it...
 
2012-01-02 01:56:50 PM
No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?
 
2012-01-02 01:57:52 PM
I went and got my GED BECAUSE of an interview that went well until that final question. I do not blame THEM for that question. I found the fault with my lifestyle and at the age of 33, I took the test. (and passed)

Now I got that job in a factory used to produce electrolytes for the world's largest sports drink manufacturer.

/only half of this is true
 
2012-01-02 01:59:10 PM
This is more of a Harrison Bergeron moment and less Idiocracy.
 
2012-01-02 02:00:01 PM
Is that like liberals trying to divide by zero?
 
2012-01-02 02:03:33 PM

BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?


While we are at it, stop demanding bachelor degrees for everything.
 
2012-01-02 02:04:16 PM
Simple solution, require an associates degree instead!
 
2012-01-02 02:04:16 PM

BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?


Because not as many black people have high school diplomas?

This is perfectly valid. If you require a credential that's not required for the job, and it has the effect of discriminating against a group, you're liable. It's the same issue as a job that requires you to lift heavy objects- if you require that an applicant be able to lift 200 lbs, but you would only ever need to lift 50 during the course of the job, congrats, the EEOC will be filing a suit against you for discriminating against women.
 
2012-01-02 02:05:13 PM

BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?


Indeed. I've seen job postings lately for receptionists, office clerks, etc. all of which *require* a 4-year college degree. Now I'll grant you, a person with a degree is likely to have some of the skills that you will need for the job. On the other hand, over the years of my working life I've encountered many perfectly competent people in those kinds of positions who didn't have a degree. It makes no sense.
 
2012-01-02 02:06:20 PM
There really is no reason someone with a learning disability should not be able to get a high school diploma, considering that laws such as IDEA allow for adjusting curricula to meet student need.
 
2012-01-02 02:06:25 PM

Civil_War2_Time: Is that like liberals trying to divide by zero?


FTFY -- why needlessly complicate things?

/don't bother me, I'm batein'
 
2012-01-02 02:06:39 PM
The ADA is a good example of poorly written legislation that should have never been signed into law.
 
2012-01-02 02:07:25 PM
Can we classify being a teenager as a disability finally as well?
 
2012-01-02 02:08:32 PM

LoneWolf343: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

While we are at it, stop demanding bachelor degrees for everything.


This. Would you prefer a frat boy or someone who can actually perform the job?
 
2012-01-02 02:09:24 PM

FSTFKL: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

Indeed. I've seen job postings lately for receptionists, office clerks, etc. all of which *require* a 4-year college degree. Now I'll grant you, a person with a degree is likely to have some of the skills that you will need for the job. On the other hand, over the years of my working life I've encountered many perfectly competent people in those kinds of positions who didn't have a degree. It makes no sense.


It does make sense, employers want an easy way to screen for some minimum level of intelligence. Sure, a person without a college degree may by really smart, but they can also be dumb as a nail. Most people with college degrees should be intelligent enough learn a job without too much difficulty just like they managed to figure out how to graduate.
 
2012-01-02 02:10:04 PM
EEOC says High School Diploma requirement might violate Americans with Disabilities Act, but only if a high school diploma is not necessary to carry out the job.

FTFY, subby.
 
2012-01-02 02:10:37 PM
A high school diploma is just a certificate that shows you went through twelve years of helping your local school make a sh*t-ton of money through it's SAT scoring racket. Good for you, brah.
 
2012-01-02 02:12:20 PM

Monty845: It does make sense, employers want an easy way to screen for some minimum level of intelligence.


Well, I can think of worse ways, but not many.
 
2012-01-02 02:12:21 PM

FSTFKL: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

Indeed. I've seen job postings lately for receptionists, office clerks, etc. all of which *require* a 4-year college degree. Now I'll grant you, a person with a degree is likely to have some of the skills that you will need for the job. On the other hand, over the years of my working life I've encountered many perfectly competent people in those kinds of positions who didn't have a degree. It makes no sense.


You know the reason for that? Because the economy is crap and it's an easy way to narrow down the applicant pool. You open it up to anybody, you get a thousand applicants. You require the bachelors, and all of a sudden you have a much smaller pool to go over, filled with the people with the highest credentials. If you're planning on hiring the most qualified person anyway, why bother with the giant pile of resumes you're just gonna toss anyway?

It's not a question of whether the people without the degree could do the job. Of course many of them could. But if you can get a better candidate in that job for the same pay anyway, you get value added. And you have to waste less time sorting through applications.

It's the same reason jobs that used to be entry level professional are now requiring 2-3 years experience. Where they might have been hiring people right out of college in the past, it's now easy to just get people with experience already for the same low, low wage.

If you want to get a decent office job with a HS diploma, then you're probably going to have to wait until college grads are able to get better ones, because if it's down to the HS diploma guy or the guy with the bachelors, the guy with the college degree is most always going to get that job.
 
2012-01-02 02:12:25 PM

LegacyDL: So basically if you don't have a high school diploma you're disabled?

Got it...


Not exactly. If you don't have a diploma because you're disabled, then you're a nightmare for every employer who wants competent people. If you're just a lazy farkup with no medical cert, you're not going to suddenly be employable.
 
2012-01-02 02:12:28 PM
It's getting no where near the press that it should be getting, but Obama's EEOC is completely off the f-ing rails.

Jackie Berrien (the EEOC Chairwoman) is a borderline Commie.

Even Obama's gal (Kagan) told her to "get stuffed" when she tried to take over an EEOC "church exception" that's been in place for DECADES and is clearly rooted in the Constitution.

Honestly, do your own Google research...it's beyond ridiculous the shiat they are trying to push over there.
 
2012-01-02 02:12:31 PM
I don't necessarily agree with the way they're going about it, but the fact that a high school diploma is a near-universal requirement is not a good thing and something should be done. It doesn't make menial workers more competent or intelligent, it just makes a high school education less rigorous and takes limited funds from people who could benefit from additional attention and shifts it to people who are and will always be rock-stupid. Aside from that it makes low-income people, who are far more likely to drop out, less able to make a living and therefore more likely to commit crimes. This coincidentally disproportionally hurts minorities. I could go on, but long story short, I think the push to make everyone graduate high school is maybe the single biggest problem in American education today.
 
2012-01-02 02:13:49 PM

Monty845: FSTFKL: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

Indeed. I've seen job postings lately for receptionists, office clerks, etc. all of which *require* a 4-year college degree. Now I'll grant you, a person with a degree is likely to have some of the skills that you will need for the job. On the other hand, over the years of my working life I've encountered many perfectly competent people in those kinds of positions who didn't have a degree. It makes no sense.

It does make sense, employers want an easy way to screen for some minimum level of intelligence. Sure, a person without a college degree may by really smart, but they can also be dumb as a nail. Most people with college degrees should be intelligent enough learn a job without too much difficulty just like they managed to figure out how to graduate.


A piece of paper does not indicate intelligence, only an ability to take tests and regurgitate information.
 
2012-01-02 02:14:08 PM

Monty845: FSTFKL: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

Indeed. I've seen job postings lately for receptionists, office clerks, etc. all of which *require* a 4-year college degree. Now I'll grant you, a person with a degree is likely to have some of the skills that you will need for the job. On the other hand, over the years of my working life I've encountered many perfectly competent people in those kinds of positions who didn't have a degree. It makes no sense.

It does make sense, employers want an easy way to screen for some minimum level of intelligence. Sure, a person without a college degree may by really smart, but they can also be dumb as a nail. Most people with college degrees should be intelligent enough learn a job without too much difficulty just like they managed to figure out how to graduate.


I disagree. If you look at the person's resume and see that (for example) they've got a few year's experience as a receptionist already, I think you can safely assume that he/she has the required level of intelligence to do the job. Your argument only makes sense if you are hiring really young people with little or no work history.
 
2012-01-02 02:17:33 PM
The diploma does not mean you are smart, it means you can follow through on something long enough to complete it. If you cannot stay focused long enough to get through high school, how can you be expected to show up to work everyday?
 
2012-01-02 02:18:10 PM
Actual letter here (new window)
 
JVD
2012-01-02 02:18:12 PM
A High school diploma proves you are capable of accomplishing the simplest of tasks. Not having one means you most likely have major character flaws and make poor decisions.

Don't get all butthurt when you can't work in a factory or in an office because you gave up at life and are stuck flipping burgers or bagging groceries.

EEOC is a joke.
 
2012-01-02 02:18:32 PM

cptjeff: FSTFKL: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

Indeed. I've seen job postings lately for receptionists, office clerks, etc. all of which *require* a 4-year college degree. Now I'll grant you, a person with a degree is likely to have some of the skills that you will need for the job. On the other hand, over the years of my working life I've encountered many perfectly competent people in those kinds of positions who didn't have a degree. It makes no sense.

You know the reason for that? Because the economy is crap and it's an easy way to narrow down the applicant pool. You open it up to anybody, you get a thousand applicants. You require the bachelors, and all of a sudden you have a much smaller pool to go over, filled with the people with the highest credentials. If you're planning on hiring the most qualified person anyway, why bother with the giant pile of resumes you're just gonna toss anyway?

It's not a question of whether the people without the degree could do the job. Of course many of them could. But if you can get a better candidate in that job for the same pay anyway, you get value added. And you have to waste less time sorting through applications.

It's the same reason jobs that used to be entry level professional are now requiring 2-3 years experience. Where they might have been hiring people right out of college in the past, it's now easy to just get people with experience already for the same low, low wage.

If you want to get a decent office job with a HS diploma, then you're probably going to have to wait until college grads are able to get better ones, because if it's down to the HS diploma guy or the guy with the bachelors, the guy with the college degree is most always going to get that job.


Hooey. There's a woman in our office who's been a receptionist for over a decade. Her degree or lack thereof is irrelevant to how well she does that job. And, she's less likely to jump to a "better" job when the economy improves.

College degree or a certain amount of experience, that would make sense. Especially if the degree were required to be in a relevant field. Any college degree, no experience requirement (as I've often seen) not so much. I suspect age discrimination, not an attempt to narrow the pool.
 
2012-01-02 02:19:37 PM

LoneWolf343: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

While we are at it, stop demanding bachelor degrees for everything.


Jesus f*cking Christ, THIS.
 
2012-01-02 02:20:43 PM

Disfunction: If people aren't book smart, they're not stupid... they're learning disabled. And why should employers be able to eliminate a candidate for a job because of their disability?


Uhm... 'cause if they haven't demonstrated the baseline learning capacity generally associated with a HSD, how can they demonstrate the baseline learning capacity associated with learning the new job?

For pitty's sake; get a farkin' GED even - they're free and so are the prep classes. Do something to show an investment in yourself, instead of worrying about what you don't have. Farkin' too lazy to try .... gowldammmed right you ought to be discriminated against.

That word can have positive connotations too.

/Not "you" in particular -- more of a generic, all-inclusive sense.

//back to batein'
 
2012-01-02 02:21:03 PM

JVD: A High school diploma proves you are capable of accomplishing the simplest of tasks. Not having one means you most likely have major character flaws and make poor decisions.

Don't get all butthurt when you can't work in a factory or in an office because you gave up at life and are stuck flipping burgers or bagging groceries.

EEOC is a joke.


Exactly. If you don't have one, your basically saying that you can't do the most simple tasks in life.

But I agree with the other posters that requiring a Bachelors for everything is BS.
 
2012-01-02 02:21:33 PM
We use the HS diploma/GED criteria to screen out applicants where I work. More than indicating whether someone is intelligent enough to perform the job tasks we need them to perform, having at least one or the other suggests that someone had the drive to finish what they started.

It is the same principle as requiring a college degree for certain positions. It's not that someone without the degree couldn't do the job. It's that when there are dozens of applicants, we would rather choose someone who has already proven they have enough ambition to improve themselves.
 
2012-01-02 02:21:39 PM

FSTFKL: Monty845: FSTFKL: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

Indeed. I've seen job postings lately for receptionists, office clerks, etc. all of which *require* a 4-year college degree. Now I'll grant you, a person with a degree is likely to have some of the skills that you will need for the job. On the other hand, over the years of my working life I've encountered many perfectly competent people in those kinds of positions who didn't have a degree. It makes no sense.

It does make sense, employers want an easy way to screen for some minimum level of intelligence. Sure, a person without a college degree may by really smart, but they can also be dumb as a nail. Most people with college degrees should be intelligent enough learn a job without too much difficulty just like they managed to figure out how to graduate.

I disagree. If you look at the person's resume and see that (for example) they've got a few year's experience as a receptionist already, I think you can safely assume that he/she has the required level of intelligence to do the job. Your argument only makes sense if you are hiring really young people with little or no work history.


It's not about if they can do the job or not. It's about making it easy for the HR person to actually conduct the search when there's a glut of candidates.

Because they'll find someone with a college degree, or some college experience, who has had similar experience working as well. And they'll pick that person. And they'll have wasted their time going over applications from a bunch of people with GEDs who really wouldn't be well suited for the job.

If you're trying to fill a job, and you can get 250 applications, 100 of which might be qualified candidates, if you only require a HS diploma, or you could get 75 applicants, 50 of whom might be qualified if you require a bachelors, why wouldn't you just go ahead and list a bachelors degree as a requirement? It makes your work easier, and you still wind up with the same pile of top candidates, since that college degree helps a resume rise to the top anyway.
 
2012-01-02 02:21:40 PM
Perhaps those of you who think that 'it's just a piece of paper,' with no bearing on intelligence or qualification forget to consider the following:

1. It's a measure of commitment...and a fairly minimum one at that. You can point to it and say, 'I started this, and saw it through to the finish.'

2. It's pretty unintelligent to be going through highschool, and making the decision to quit, knowing that a huge portion of the job market would be closed to you, and that there is a strong social stigma attached.*

*Yeah, I get it, not all stories are the same...lots of good people don't finish for perfectly valid reasons...but if you quit because of whatever, then this applies.
 
2012-01-02 02:22:17 PM

Coach_J: It's getting no where near the press that it should be getting, but Obama's EEOC is completely off the f-ing rails.

Jackie Berrien (the EEOC Chairwoman) is a borderline Commie.

Even Obama's gal (Kagan) told her to "get stuffed" when she tried to take over an EEOC "church exception" that's been in place for DECADES and is clearly rooted in the Constitution.

Honestly, do your own Google research...it's beyond ridiculous the shiat they are trying to push over there.


This is what happens when you appoint a person whose only real world experience is lawyering for the NAACP.
 
2012-01-02 02:22:47 PM
The diploma's a joke anyway. In my kid's school there are two profoundly Autistic students and five severely SEVERELY retarded students; they will all receive regular High School diplomas. None of them will ever even be capable of shepherding shopping carts at the local Target.

Robert Townsend had the correct approach: "I will not hold your degree against you if you promise not to try to impress me with it."

/Became a teacher because HS sucked, wanted to change the system.
//Left teaching because the system is rigged and corrupt; was a good teacher but was unable to change anything.
 
2012-01-02 02:29:44 PM
It's bullshiat like this that will put us on the road to being a 3rd world shiat hole.
 
2012-01-02 02:31:17 PM

cptjeff: FSTFKL: Monty845: FSTFKL: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

Indeed. I've seen job postings lately for receptionists, office clerks, etc. all of which *require* a 4-year college degree. Now I'll grant you, a person with a degree is likely to have some of the skills that you will need for the job. On the other hand, over the years of my working life I've encountered many perfectly competent people in those kinds of positions who didn't have a degree. It makes no sense.

It does make sense, employers want an easy way to screen for some minimum level of intelligence. Sure, a person without a college degree may by really smart, but they can also be dumb as a nail. Most people with college degrees should be intelligent enough learn a job without too much difficulty just like they managed to figure out how to graduate.

I disagree. If you look at the person's resume and see that (for example) they've got a few year's experience as a receptionist already, I think you can safely assume that he/she has the required level of intelligence to do the job. Your argument only makes sense if you are hiring really young people with little or no work history.

It's not about if they can do the job or not. It's about making it easy for the HR person to actually conduct the search when there's a glut of candidates.

Because they'll find someone with a college degree, or some college experience, who has had similar experience working as well. And they'll pick that person. And they'll have wasted their time going over applications from a bunch of people with GEDs who really wouldn't be well suited for the job.

If you're trying to fill a job, and you can get 250 applications, 100 of which might be qualified candidates, if you only require a HS diploma, or you could get 75 applicants, 50 ...


If you are looking to hire people for certain positions, I think you reach a point where a college degree would be irrelevant if the person had a certain level of experience. And even then there are other considerations. Comparing two potential receptionists with a long work history, depending on the business I might well choose one who is bilingual over the one with a college degree, for example. I might choose the one with experience in a similar business with no degree over one with a degree and experience in a different kind of setting.

You are saying that HR people are too lazy to figure out what the actual requirements for the job are and post *that* so they won't get too many applicants. Yes, that sounds about right.
 
2012-01-02 02:31:36 PM

OneNightStand: /Became a teacher because HS sucked, wanted to change the system.
//Left teaching because the system is rigged and corrupt; was a good teacher but was unable to change anything.



You don't ever change the system by being a cog. If you want to change things, get yourself into running the system. Run for your local school board, county board, city council or state legislature. If you want to change the system, get involved on the systemic level. One person can't change a damn thing from the ground floor- you can make it a little better for your students, but you have nowhere near the leverage needed to move an institution.

Get involved. We need more people who want to actually reform education to benefit the students on school boards and less busybody helicopter moms trying to require uniforms and make sure anybody who bites pizza into the shape of a gun is suspended.
 
2012-01-02 02:31:53 PM

DeathByGeekSquad: LoneWolf343: BrainyBear: No big deal. Employment discrimination laws just demand that requirements actually be relevant to the job they're hiring for. If you don't need a high school diploma to be the custodian, then why needlessly require it?

While we are at it, stop demanding bachelor degrees for everything.

This. Would you prefer a frat boy or someone who can actually perform the job?


Because only frat guys get college degrees or lac the ability to perform the job?
 
2012-01-02 02:33:20 PM

malaktaus: I don't necessarily agree with the way they're going about it, but the fact that a high school diploma is a near-universal requirement is not a good thing and something should be done. It doesn't make menial workers more competent or intelligent, it just makes a high school education less rigorous and takes limited funds from people who could benefit from additional attention and shifts it to people who are and will always be rock-stupid. Aside from that it makes low-income people, who are far more likely to drop out, less able to make a living and therefore more likely to commit crimes. This coincidentally disproportionally hurts minorities. I could go on, but long story short, I think the push to make everyone graduate high school is maybe the single biggest problem in American education today.


Soooo... if high school were harder:, more kids would stay, get a diploma, land a job, and not be criminals? Why not go about it that way, then, instead of doing away with the employers' ability to link educatiion with motivation and employability??

Even better -- make schools that serve mainly minority populations even more rigorous to, you know, disproportionally help them.

Nowhere in the discussion is this "push" to "make everyone graduate high school" -- at issue is whether or not employers can consider HSD status in employment decisions. You don't wanna get a HSD/GED, fine. Settle for the lot in life you've settled for, and quit your biatching.
 
2012-01-02 02:33:29 PM

cptjeff: It's about making it easy for the HR person to actually conduct the search when there's a glut of candidates.


One of thing that most HR people are evaluated on is turnover. You can hire college educated people for administrative and clerk positions and they will do a better job, in general, but they will leave in 18 months. If you hire a qualified person without a degree they will be there for decades.
 
2012-01-02 02:33:45 PM

OneNightStand: The diploma's a joke anyway. In my kid's school there are two profoundly Autistic students and five severely SEVERELY retarded students; they will all receive regular High School diplomas. None of them will ever even be capable of shepherding shopping carts at the local Target.

Robert Townsend had the correct approach: "I will not hold your degree against you if you promise not to try to impress me with it."

/Became a teacher because HS sucked, wanted to change the system.
//Left teaching because the system is rigged and corrupt; was a good teacher but was unable to change anything.


Will they receive actual diplomas or merely certificates of attendance?
 
Displayed 50 of 128 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report