Insanity

[isobars]

Tsunami Warning!

NY's 9th District, NYC, elected its first Republican representative since the 1920sw ... and by a huge, no-contest margin. Even the Jewish vote went to the GOP. Then the next domino fell, in Nevada. Democrat voters are catching on to this clown.

Speaking of clowns, his new stimulus ... oh, yeah ... "JOBS" ... plan prohibits employers from using unemployment history -- previously known as employment history by most employers -- in deciding whom to hire, under penalty of federal law. IOW, the slacker who sat on his ass watching American Idol for two years at the taxpayers' expense because he didn't want to stock groceries can now sue a company for hiring instead the more qualified self-supporting applicant who just got laid off last week at one of his three jobs. Lawyers' ads will scream from our TV sets "Not hired because you haven't accepted a job for 18 months? Sue the bastards ... with our help." This either forces the employer to pay the slacker to go back to watching TV and leaves him no money to hire the hard worker, or it forces him to hire the slacker and make consumers pay more for shoddier goods and service. "Made in America" will translate around the world into "Assembled in Obamaland by slugs too GD lazy to give a damn about quality".

Put this fool back in office and he'll be telling you which hand to wipe with. I know you lefties want that, but anyone with a modicum of independence and drive will resent the hell out of it.

[pueno]

[capetonian]

[windoggi]

A confusion of anger and fear. And revenge, in his world, is truly a sweet thing.

[GURGLETROUSERS]

But he IS making a valid point, don't you think?

We have a whole raft of E.U. employment directives over here, and the law of unintended consequences has certainly 'kicked in'. Whether you consider things right or wrong, fair or unfair, small business, which should be the backbone of any economic recovery, is now wary of taking on new staff, especially women.

It is a fact that some people DO attempt to play any system, and if small workforce employers are unable to check what they could be letting themselves in for (young women who won't disclose that they have just become pregnant and will be demanding their right to time off and full pay for the statutory period for example) they just won't hire them.

So what IS the answer?

[MalibuGuru]

Or they will only hire older women

[GURGLETROUSERS]

Actually, that is a fair point Steven.

One of our super market chains has made a point of hiring older ladies, because of their work ethic. They claim them to be more efficient than the young.

Not sure how they circumvent discrimination law, though that never seems to be a problem in other work fields, when older more experienced people are usually passed over in favour of the young!

[coboardhead]

As a small business owner, these concerns are real.

I hired a new engineering associate a few years back. I worried that either a young woman (potential maternity issues), handicapped individual, smoker, or Natioanal Guard Reservist would apply. Any of theses people would have been almost impossible to integrate into my small business.

Isobars...this was before Obama was even a Senator...Not his fault this time.

[swchandler]

I'm a bit curious GT about the recognized pregnancy policy in the UK. What is the accepted length of time allowed, and does full pay apply over the whole period? Seems a bit untoward that someone could be receiving full pay for not working. However, I'm in agreement that a woman should be able take a leave of absence to have their child and not lose their job during that period, but that's kind of the limit in my view.

[pueno]