2-Month Suspension

[Eclipse]

The short answer is that CAP volunteers do have to abide by Equal Opportunity laws, which is what was applicable to the original context.  My sense is that the squadron commander may be stepping very close to the limits of various discriminations laws without knowing it.  I base that on my experience of seeing new leaders in business.

What is your CAP experience?

There was never a "mention" of discrimination by the OP.

[JeffDG]

Pet Peeve...

Saying the word "discrimination" like it's a bad thing.  We all discriminate all the time.  Go to Burger King instead of McD's...you're discriminating.  Every single time you make a choice or decision, you're discriminating.  Don't believe me, pick up that dictionary that's gathering dust nearby and read the definition of the word...

There are specific grounds of discrimination that we, as a society, have determined are not appropriate to use.  For example, if I'm hiring someone to design a bridge, I'm entirely free to discriminate against those who have not received a degree in civil engineering.  I'm not, however, allowed to exclude Catholics just because I don't like the Pope.  If I'm renting an apartment, I can discriminate against you if you have no visible means of financial support and I don't think you can pay, but cannot discriminate against you because you're Chinese.

[lordmonar]

Are there any more lawyers here in the barracks?  Because I have this legal problem I need help with . . . ..   

Legal advice and information given by anonymous folks on the internet is worth exactly what you pay for it.  And frequently less.




Folks, if you have a CAP-related legal question, please ask your friendly, neighborood legal officer.  That is why we have them.   And they are dedicated, knowledgeable volunteers.

Just like you.

Sorry your Judgeship, sir. 

[Eclipse]

Pet Peeve...

Saying the word "discrimination" like it's a bad thing.  We all discriminate all the time.  Go to Burger King instead of McD's...you're discriminating.  Every single time you make a choice or decision, you're discriminating.  Don't believe me, pick up that dictionary that's gathering dust nearby and read the definition of the word...

There are specific grounds of discrimination that we, as a society, have determined are not appropriate to use.  For example, if I'm hiring someone to design a bridge, I'm entirely free to discriminate against those who have not received a degree in civil engineering.  I'm not, however, allowed to exclude Catholics just because I don't like the Pope.  If I'm renting an apartment, I can discriminate against you if you have no visible means of financial support and I don't think you can pay, but cannot discriminate against you because you're Chinese.

An excellent point.

CAP commanders and others in leadership roles are actually charged with "good" discrimination.  Whether we're talking about specific skills (flying), or behavior (Creepy McWeirdington).  Failure to exercise those decisions properly is at least as detrimental to the organization as improperly singling people out based on a legally protected class.

And again, the OP never alleged any discrimination.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

The issue of discrimination, as JeffDG pointed out, can be a touchy one.

It is for me because I have experienced it in the workplace to the point where I lost a job due to a disability I have and I did take it to the state EEOC.  However, it was in a hardcore "employment-at-will" state and the attitude of state government was first, the employer is always right and second, see rule number 1.

CAP has a clearly-stated antidiscrimination policy, as bflynn pointed out.  However, the trouble is discerning where personality conflicts (which aren't illegal) and legitimate discrimination (which is) begin and end.  Just because you don't like someone isn't discrimination.  However, not wanting someone in your unit/corporation because of a factor like race, religion, disability, etc. and using terms like "unsuitability" to cover yourself is a potential minefield.

Not everyone is going to like you.  There are many who don't like me.  It's life.  However, I prefer to be told simply that "I don't like you" rather than trying to pretty it up with other terms.  Who knows?  Maybe I don't like you either!

I have a disability, not one that is visually apparent but nonetheless one I live with every day of my life.  I have also told CAP commanders I have this disability, and it is clearly documented on my Form 60.

Thus far, I haven't experienced any grief in CAP over this, and I hope I don't.  If I do, you can bet I'll be causing some continental seismic shift over it.

This case sounds, with the limited amount of information the OP gives, like a personality conflict.  It is usually very difficult to resolve those when one person refuses to budge.

[bflynn]

Saying the word "discrimination" like it's a bad thing.

When it's used to deny someone what they want to do, then I think it is a bad thing.

I don't know that's what is happening here.  I just said that I get that sense based on my experience in the professional world.

[Eclipse]

Ignore - (ravings)

[JeffDG]

Saying the word "discrimination" like it's a bad thing.

When it's used to deny someone what they want to do, then I think it is a bad thing.

I don't know that's what is happening here.  I just said that I get that sense based on my experience in the professional world.

So, if you have two candidates who want a job with you, you hire them both?  What about 5?

[SarDragon]

Saying the word "discrimination" like it's a bad thing.

When it's used to deny someone what they want to do, then I think it is a bad thing.

I don't know that's what is happening here.  I just said that I get that sense based on my experience in the professional world.

So, if you have two candidates who want a job with you, you hire them both?  What about 5?

Objectively evaluate each applicant's skills and knowledge, as related to the job requirements, and hire the most qualified.

[davidsinn]

Saying the word "discrimination" like it's a bad thing.

When it's used to deny someone what they want to do, then I think it is a bad thing.

I don't know that's what is happening here.  I just said that I get that sense based on my experience in the professional world.

So, if you have two candidates who want a job with you, you hire them both?  What about 5?

Objectively evaluate each applicant's skills and knowledge, as related to the job requirements, and hire the most qualified.

So you discriminate against the lesser qualified...

[NIN]

sheesh, I was a Squadron CC as a 22 year old 1st Lt.

Me too. Twice.

[Eclipse]

Wait, who's hiring?  Do you have a contact?  I have a hammer.

[FlyTiger77]

I love these threads when they get to this point.

[SarDragon]

Saying the word "discrimination" like it's a bad thing.

When it's used to deny someone what they want to do, then I think it is a bad thing.

I don't know that's what is happening here.  I just said that I get that sense based on my experience in the professional world.

So, if you have two candidates who want a job with you, you hire them both?  What about 5?

Objectively evaluate each applicant's skills and knowledge, as related to the job requirements, and hire the most qualified.

So you discriminate against the lesser qualified...

Yup. See post #41 above.

[bflynn]

So you discriminate against the lesser qualified...

There is a difference between discrimination and selection.  They are related, but distinctly different activities.

If this has drifted into a contest of sematics the thread isn't worth continuing to me.

[SarDragon]

It appears that you attach an entirely negative connotation to the word. I do not.

The specific definition depends on context. In our example, it could be taken as positive or negative, based on the surrounding verbiage.

[RRLE]

Since the word 'discriminate' was brought up in an employment relationship discussion and you are discussing the law, then a peek at the legal definition may clear up the confusion. First, the law does not bar discrimination per se. The law does not allow an individual to

discriminate against a qualified individual.

So with the modifier 'qualified' in place the arguement about discriminating against lesser qualified individuals goes away. Nor does the law care about whether you eat at McDonald's or Burger King or decide to select a chicken eatery instead.

See 42 USC 1211 Definitions and 42 USC 1212 Discrimination

[JeffDG]

So you discriminate against the lesser qualified...

There is a difference between discrimination and selection.  They are related, but distinctly different activities.

If this has drifted into a contest of sematics the thread isn't worth continuing to me.

So, you decided to criticize my post without reading it.

Actually, there isn't a difference between discrimination and selection.  They are, effectively, synonyms.  If you go back and read what I actually wrote, you will note that I made clear that there are grounds of discrimination that society has deemed unacceptable.

Discrimination is a critical skill that needs to be developed.  If you're going to go and scream "RACIST" every time someone discriminates, then you don't have a clue what the term means.

[bflynn]

Sorry, you're playing semantics games, trying to convince everyone that black is white and red is green.  Please, in the interest of safety, avoid crosswalks for a while?

[abdsp51]

Wait for it....