6 ms·

how is that discrimination other than signaling you know the language, have a job permit and so on.

• LoganDark 3y ago
  Because then employers will treat the absence of that signal as a potential concern?
  • pwb25 3y ago
    yes, because it is
    • LoganDark 3y ago
      Look, "potential concerns" shouldn't matter unless they're real concerns. Judging someone based on "potential concerns" is discrimination. Judge someone based on who they are, not who you think they might be.
      • pwb25 3y ago
        in theory yes but people judge you for school or whatever on a CV anyway
        • LoganDark 3y ago
          Which is why discrimination laws exist. The fact that people do it doesn't make it right.
• j7ake 3y ago
  Because you’re assuming just from the name or photo thay someone knows the language and have job permit. This means children from immigrant families growing up in Europe would be discriminated against simply because of how they look and what their last name is. That’s classic discrimination.
  • pwb25 3y ago
    this you will see on their education history though, but sure thats the same for europeans in china too and so on
    • Reubachi 3y ago
      Okay, so if I put down that education history, then what? I can lie. My points are that hiring should be more based on applied challenges and gauging recruit success in context. The heavy cost of vetting should be part of the onboarding, not recruiting; which would put the onus on the employer and away from the often discriminated employee.