Those bastards! /s
Yeah, I wouldn’t put anything past those sneaky bastards. Like joining the Republican Party, then going to conventions and rallies and saying racist and fascist things, then voting for the most MAGA candidates so they can create the false narrative that Republicans are a bunch of gay racist fascists so they can turn America against the GOP.
The real sneaky ones trick the Republican candidates and office holders into doing and saying ridiculous, hateful things.
Like that Mamdani character - trolling the right by getting elected Mayor as Muslim just so he can attend the 9/11 ceremony and rub it in Republicans’ faces.
Ah, and now we have examples for both the bloodlust and the bigotry of the pubbies.
Surely Rudy Giuliani’s attempts to shame Mamdani into staying away from today’s 9/11 ceremonies, qualifies as a Stupid Republican Idea.
In the event Mamdani, who has about 12 million times the social intelligence that Rudy has, came up to Rudy today and put out his hand. Mamdani knew that Rudy would be unable to resist the Relevance of being shown all over the media in the resulting photos.
I hope he washed that hand for a very long time afterwards.
NC Senate candidate Michael Watley posts that he will never forget the tragic events of (checks notes) 9/1.
Oh, so Giuliani is back to admitting that 9/11 happened, again?
Remember, remember, the first of September,
Airliners, terrorism, and plot.
My Twitter app widget,
Made me miss a digit,
Just a single one I forgot.
Golf clap.
It was a Saturday and UNC lost to Maryland to start their season at 0-2. Some folks are just a little too attached to their teams
Just for fun, let’s check out his crimes.
And those were highlighted on his resume.
If we’re still pretending that Mitch McConnell is alive then we should be able to criticize him for his silence on the anniversary of 9/11.
His office released a written statement. Really
Turns out polticizing federal job applications is not cool.
But what’s the dictatorship’s position on this query?
&
Liars must lie in service of the chief liar, evidently.
From @Monty’s quote, not Monty:
Anecdotal evidence only, but I’ve learned that when it comes to hiring, “optional” in the American context actually means “mandatory.”
Long story, but years ago I was part of a legal team helping a US company set up shop in here in Canada. My part dealt with employment law, somebody else looked after incorporation, somebody else looked after commercial real estate, and so on. Anyway, the company was already trying to recruit Canadians to work for them, and I was asked to investigate their hiring practices, to see if they conformed with Canadian law. To do so, and with the full knowledge and cooperation of my US contact, I applied for a job.
Yes, I made up a resume, showing that I had a great education from a well-respected Canadian school (that I never attended), and lots of experience in the area (from companies that were made up). Some of the blanks on the online application were listed as “optional,” so I opted not to answer them. The application was going to the HR department of the US company’s head office, not to my contact, and the HR department was not in on the ruse.
It wasn’t an hour after I pressed “Send” before I got an e-mail from the company’s HR department asking that I please fill out the race question, and the date-of-birth question. Wait—weren’t those optional? Well, yes, but we’d really, really like you to answer them. Pleeease? We have to report these things to …
So they were not really optional after all.
In my report to my US contact, I mentioned this, and how asking about race or age (among other things, like my driver’s license number when the job did not involve driving) was illegal under Canadian law. Especially when such questions were “optional” when they weren’t really. The company could not ask such things legally, and was open to a lawsuit if it tried to.
In short, the company conformed to Canadian employment law when it finally got going in Canada, and things worked out well. But I well remember our telephone conference when I laid all kinds of bad news on our US client, who was dumbstruck when it learned that Canadian companies hire totally on merit, with no regard to any other race, age, family status, religion, driver’s abstract for jobs that don’t involve driving, and other irrelevant to the job, factor.
I’m sure the questions asked by OPM are perfectly optional. You don’t have to answer if you don’t want to, they will still take the application, but if you don’t (or answer the wrong way) it will be put at the bottom of the stack behind more “worthy” applicants.
Depending on how the HR application works, these are things that are saved but not tied to a particular application. It is standard practice to save demographic information for reporting purposes. This is, so that if asked, they can say how many people applied from what group, and how many people where hired for what group. If the HR person either did not understand that or did not explain that to you correctly, that is indeed the problem. The optional questions are not.
I have had to do reporting on demographic information for submitted content, which is anonymized, so that we can get a picture of what kind of people are submitting, and if we are doing a good job of being representative of work across different demographics.
//i\\
But if the HR person said that the questions were required, when the form said they were optional, that was also a problem.
Spoons was not clear that they said they were required only that they just wrote to ask that they answer because of reporting. Spoons then implied it was needed for use in hiring decisions. Now, perhaps that was true, but as someone who has worked on the collection of demographics data, i also know that it can be for general reporting and anonymized and that is common practice in a lot of places where the optional questions are asked.
//i\\
That’s right. We don’t need some crazy, misogynistic, hateful religion telling good Americans what we can and cannot do. Tell all those christians to keep it to themselves.