Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCKING

Opinions, comments, critiques, and what you hear is going on – post it, share it!
timryan
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:40 am

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by timryan » Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:24 am

Radioelizabeth, I wish you well. I made my case- which is rock solid, have backed it up laws that protect you and I, and shown you to be at the very least ignorant. Good luck with your "pleasant, passionate, persuasive" business.
Last edited by timryan on Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

radioelizabeth
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by radioelizabeth » Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:29 am

Wow.

That's pretty sad you still think you have this right. I mean, I actually feel bad for you. Sincerely. I really wanted you to grasp this and learn something.

Alas....

:/

radioelizabeth
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by radioelizabeth » Tue Aug 30, 2011 11:30 am

I actually did cite the law, it's the occupational qualification - remember.

And, it certainly does appear that neither of you understand talent is a role. This is just bad radio. To suggest a talent isn't a role is to seriously not understand what an air personality is hired to do.

Now, you can keep believing you have this right - you don't. Casting calls are covered and are not discrimination. You are welcome to apply for any and all casting calls regardless of your sex. But it is not discrimination to highlight the role in a casting call.

radioelizabeth
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by radioelizabeth » Tue Aug 30, 2011 1:53 pm

wow.

Sorry danno, but the role of a talent is to be just that: a talent. If you think the air personality isn't a "role" at the station, you aren't doing radio right.

A look at all successful talents shows they understand this and provide it. Ratings prove it.

As to the rest, I was very clear what the occupational qualification covered. I have never stated it covered all of what you claim. But casting calls for specific roles of male or female (and sometimes age) are covered and are not discrimination.

It's not bigotry to solicit a role for a female or male. Just as it isn't bigotry to solicit a role for a child or senior citizen. If you think you can meet the requirements and play that role, apply/audition. Go for it. No one is stopping anyone from doing that. But putting the specifics of the role in the call is not discrimination.

Show any posting for a position that is not talent requesting this and then you will have a point, but thus far, all you are showing is calls for the specific talent role a station wants filled.

Learn this so you don't sound foolish. Thanks.

radioelizabeth
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by radioelizabeth » Tue Aug 30, 2011 1:54 pm

Oh...and next time... please don't misquote me. You have more than once suggested in the quote feature that I said something I never did. It is dishonest. Thanks.

robnokshus
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:15 am

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by robnokshus » Tue Aug 30, 2011 3:18 pm

Well you tried Elizabeth.

If Tim had taken the 5-minutes to Google the Statute and read down to section "E" he would have learned:

(e) Businesses or enterprises with personnel qualified on basis of religion, sex, or national origin; educational institutions with personnel of particular religion

Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, (1)it shall not be an unlawful employment practice for an employerto hire and employ employees, for an employment agency to classify, or refer for employment any individual, for a labor organization to classify its membership or to classify or refer for employment any individual, or for an employer, labor organization, or joint labor­management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining programs to admit or employ any individual in any such program, on the basis of his religion, sex, or national origin in those certain instances where religion, sex, or national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise


Let me explain: Say you need the female perspective for your morning show. This section allows you to hire a female for that purpose.

Really dude. A deep breath and 5-minutes worth of research would have saved you from this embarrassing thread.

timryan
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:40 am

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by timryan » Tue Aug 30, 2011 4:16 pm

Oh, I'm totally calm, and it's really you two who should be embarrassed.
My argument hasn't been whether you shouldn't be able to hire who you want- be it man or woman. My argument is the discrimination in the job ad it self- as in " Looking for a FEMALE________", as in "if you are a male, you need not apply". I have yet to see one single ad that has said "Looking for a male______".
From http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sex.cfm :

"Sex Discrimination & Work Situations

The law forbids discrimination when it comes to any aspect of employment, including HIRING, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoff, training, fringe benefits, and any other term or condition of employment"

And here's another read discussing this very same subject:
http://www.fordyceletter.com/2011/06/16 ... imination/
Last edited by timryan on Tue Aug 30, 2011 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

radioelizabeth
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by radioelizabeth » Tue Aug 30, 2011 4:27 pm

I'm embarrassed for Tim at this point.

timryan
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:40 am

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by timryan » Tue Aug 30, 2011 6:12 pm

And to quote Columbo " Just one more thing". Regarding the BFOQ clause that has been quoted, you are both wrong on that a swell. The razor thin BFOQ area allows for gender/ or age discrimination only when a business would be undermined because of so . For example- hooters. Their business is based on attractive, fit women serving hamburgers and hot wings. The business would be undermined if they hired a 600 pound male. If you are a mens clothing company, you are allowed to openly look for only men to model your clothing. Radio isn't hooters, or a mens clothing company, however. There really is no radio job that a male can do better than a female- and vise versa. If there is- I'd like you to show it to me. For you to use the BFOQ clause, you'd have to prove that by having a male-or female for a particular position would under mind the radio station in question, and there's no way to really prove it. Ultimately, a station is going to hire who they want, and after the T&R is sent, there is no way to prove why one person got the job over another. If asked, a PD might say "he/she didn't have the sound they were looking for". That to me is totally fine. But to openly post on a jobs site that you are only looking for a certain gender, without stating a lawful reason why you are discriminating against the other- IS unlawful.

radioelizabeth
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:31 am
Contact:

Re: Amount of male discrimination in the job posts is SHOCK

Post by radioelizabeth » Tue Aug 30, 2011 6:57 pm

Tim...

Someday, it is my hope, you understand what the word "role" means.

Also... as was already mentioned... the law does NOT in any way deal with gender. It deals with sex. These are different.

Again, I'm embarrassed for you at this point. It's just a deeper hole you keep digging yourself in...

Post Reply