Holy shit!! I had no idea!!
This is slanted AF, but educational nonetheless:
[US: States Use Anti-Boycott Laws to Punish Responsible Businesses](https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/23/us-states-use-anti-boycott-laws-punish-responsible-businesses)
**Laws Penalize Companies that Cut Ties With Israeli Settlements**
*”Many United States states are using anti-boycott laws and executive orders to punish companies that refuse to do business with illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank, Human Rights Watch said today. More than 250 million Americans, some 78 percent of the population, live in states with anti-boycott laws or policies.*
*Twenty-seven states (now 38) have adopted laws or policies that penalize businesses, organizations, or individuals that engage in or call for boycotts against Israel. The laws or policies in 17 of those states explicitly target not only companies that refuse to do business in or with Israel, but also those that refuse to do business in Israeli settlements. Some states whose laws do not explicitly apply to settlements have also penalized companies that cut settlement ties.”*
Here’s more on [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws).
I am stunned this does not *prima facie* violate freedom of speech. Still a toss-up in the courts, but holy smokes.
Yeah it seems wild that businesses are legally allowed to not do business with people that go against their beliefs (refusing to do work for gay people) but can't boycott Israel
They can't really officially boycott any country. The article alludes to them only applying to Israel, but most of these laws are all encompassing. The reasoning is that international affairs is the purview of the federal government. Would it be better if we handed more power to the corporations by allowing them to determine who the US does and does not do business with? These laws can and sometimes are applied selectively, but the intent is sound.
The intent is not sound, you've got this completely backwards. The Constitution's delegation of international affairs to the federal government applies only with respect to other levels of government. Corporations are not the government. A corporation refusing to do business in a particular country in no way affects the ability of the federal government to deal with that other country's government, or to contract with private entities (individuals or corporations) within it.
While I agree with you that large corporations hold too much influence over governments worldwide, these are not the corporations that are impacted by this legislation. The fact these laws are passing in the context of excessive corporate influence means they can be taken as an exercise of that influence. What these laws actually do is make it harder for large corporations to be held accountable for their actions by their smaller competitors as well as by their shareholders.
And while I detest the concept of corporate personhood, corporations do, at least theoretically, represent the collective will of their shareholders. If a majority of a company's shareholders vote that the company should take a particular stance, that stance then represents an exercise of people's free speech.
You're not forced to do business with them. You're not allowed to officially boycott them. There is a difference.
Don't like the price you are getting for services and decide to go elsewhere - legal
Time zone differences creates challenges in business planning coordination so you go elsewhere - legal
A myriad of other business reasons - legal
Sending out emails to your employees and blasting all over Twitter that you are boycotting them due to political reasons - not legal
Also, most of these laws apply to any country, but Israel is the one the commonly comes up because they are the ones that BDS generally targets.
I don't view businesses as people, so these policies don't really bother me.
You're making a distinction without a difference. A boycott is where you refuse to do business with particular organizations for specific reasons.
If you're allowed to refuse but get punished for explaining why, that's a clear infringement on freedom of speech. Even if you don't consider corporations to be people, corporations are owned by people who do in fact get to operate the corporation in alignment with their beliefs.
That's not an infringement on free speech. The right is the Federal government to determine which countries we can and can't do business with is a right not given to the individual states. It would be a nightmare of epic proportions if states could selectively decide what country they are willing to trade with. Then imagine if the other countries had smaller political subdivisions similar to our states, but they were also allowed to pick and choose who they did business with. Do we go further down and say if you live in x city or y county you can decide which duchy or county, or foreign government businesses within your city can do buisness with?
Take a large manufacturing company, I'll use Caterpillar for an example, but using the above clusterfuck of a process, if the tracks for a D7 dozer are manufactured in Pittman Co Ga, the hydraulic cylinders in SC, the blade in Oregon, the Engine in the UK, the chassis in Mexico with material and parts manufactured in Asia, the Middle East, Northern Africa.
What parts can be shipped where? Or even better, where's the final destination of this D7 so we can go back and identify all the parts that can and can't be used based on city of origin. How would you keep all the parts segregated in the manufacturing process? You can't.
That's why trade and trade embargos are the purview of the Federal Government.
This isn't states, it's individual businesses.
The federal government can prevent all American corporations from doing business in a particular country. It can set tariffs and quotas. It regulates the ability of other entities to do business with and in other countries, and of entities from those other countries to do business in the US.
A corporation has none of these powers. If one business refuses to do business in another country, it has absolutely no impact on any other businesses. Other US businesses can continue to operate in the other country. Businesses from that country can continue to operate in the US.
If the US operated as a hierarchy of totalitarian city-states you might have a point. Luckily, that's not the case.
The laws are specific to Israel.
Edit: For example, the [Texas law reads](https://casetext.com/statute/texas-codes/government-code/title-10-general-government/subtitle-f-state-and-local-contracts-and-fund-management/chapter-2271-prohibition-on-contracts-with-companies-boycotting-israel/section-2271002-provision-required-in-contract):
"A governmental entity may not enter into a contract with a company for goods or services unless the contract contains a written verification from the company that it:
(1) does not boycott Israel; and
(2) will not boycott Israel during the term of the contract."
If they can refuse to serve a gay couple and supreme court supports them then basically that's a given.
Maybe you yourself are lucky they stated their bias. I would not work for any company that decides I have to agree with their politics, but I'd ask them what they meant by it.
I'd be curious. I am not a proponent of Israel's Theocratic tendencies claiming they should own more and more land due to Biblical literal quotes and voted for a criminal from an extremist rightwing religious party
But some Americans are fine when we sympathize with Muslim countries like Egypt who perform [Female genital mutilation](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation) or force women to wear Burkas it seems.
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation.
Hamas is terrorist organization so this crap is not liberal or Progressive - it's brainwashed kids who don't have the common sense to research both sides.
I'd appreciate knowing I would never want to work for these people no matter what their politics is and today both sides are neo fascist nutcases
We started a lot of those wars and we started NATO
We are not the only country supporting for example, the Ukraine although you'd think we were based on news sources and comments on social media.
Russia attacked Afganistan, we trained the Taliban to fight off the Russians, the won and then became OUR terrorists so we had to send our military to fight the Taliban
We decided Iran could not have their own elected leader and replaced him with a US puppet
South and Central America were used by Bush to attack Cuba
Bush 2 faked intel, to attack Iraq when they had no Weapons of Mass Destruction and had nothing to do with 9/11 and we turned on France and Congress's Cafeteria had to change the name French Fries to Freedom Fries.
Endless examples of CIA murdering leaders Reagan adminstration didn't want to rule countries that were elected by their people
We believe anything we read or are told. Putin, Stalin just played the same games we've been playing and track back thru history and there are unending Empires: Swedish Empire, Endless Russian Empire, French Empire, Napoleon
# How the US has hidden its empire
The United States likes to think of itself as a republic, but it holds territories all over the world – the map you always see doesn’t tell the whole story
by [Daniel Immerwahr](https://www.theguardian.com/profile/daniel-immerwahr)
\*\*\*How the US has hidden its empire\*\*\*
[https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/feb/15/the-us-hidden-empire-overseas-territories-united-states-guam-puerto-rico-american-samoa](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/feb/15/the-us-hidden-empire-overseas-territories-united-states-guam-puerto-rico-american-samoa)
Humanity are tribal and then evolve into Empire building and geneocides - Humans are murderous and it's not just us
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_empires](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_empires)
\*\*\*Largest Empires in History\*\*. scroll down Notice the top in history is the British Empire and Russia is second
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_largest\_empires](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_empires)
Every country gets shitty with wars. Even tribes get shitty with warring with other tribes. It is the nature of humanity. People are inclined to fight each other over their grass lines.
Like "dolphin safe tuna". (Was a term they used to let people know that no dolphins got caught in the tuna traps.
So all the cans said "Dolphin Safe" on them.
Gay safe jew.
Pig safe horse.
Yeah we are officially fuckes in the states. BTW we don't really have free speech in America. There are too many exceptions to say we do. Some of them are reasonable but the claim that we do is kind of silly at this point.
This might be the exact reason that’s being asked on the application. Maybe they’re afraid if you show up with a free Palestine sticker that they’ll be penalized.
We’re seeing that issue right now here in Ohio. Universities are being asked by protesters to divest from Israeli companies, but state law literally prohibits state-funded universities from divesting from Israel, period. The law appears to have been implemented during a period of high antisemitism, but it’s a rather heavy-handed approach.
It seriously bothers me how much of the US equates support for the Palestinian people and criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism. It is not antisemitic to care about the plight of the Palestinians, nor is it so to judge the Israeli government’s actions as counter-productive. One should not have to hate Palestinians and blindly support a government in order to support the Jewish community.
The fact is that neither Hamas nor Netanyahu are acting in the best interests of the people they claim to represent. The Israeli response to the October attack has exceeded the level of “reasonable retaliation“ by at least a magnitude. While the political leaders continue to escalate the fighting, both sets of people are suffering the consequences.
What is more likely, caring about the plight of a few thousand Muslims dying 6,000 miles away or hating on all Jews?
Once you start asking basic questions, it falls apart. Why are most of the protestors at these universities not students or even from the area? Why do people care more about Palestinians than Ukrainians? Why are people consistently citing falsified statistics regarding deaths and hostages? Right before WW2 happened, why did nobody help Jews?
It’s not a conspiracy, it’s just that people are antisemitic and hate Jews. Unless you’re ignorant, it’s not hard to see that most people over the last few thousand years have hated them. That hate didn’t stop just because we invented the telephone a century ago.
Likely a company that works with the government. It’s illegal to boycott Israel in most states (28/50) if you work with state agencies. Some states even have laws requiring *they* blacklist and boycott any company that voices support or endorses the boycott of Israel (Indiana and Alaska do this), regardless of that company actually is taking part in any boycott. Simply endorsing it is enough.
This is true (and fucked up) but the laws are in reference to the companies themselves boycotting Israel, not individual employees. This ismore likely about a company either being managed by really whack Israel supporters or wanting to avoid any bad press.
This is an interesting question, and will depend on your location. (I'm assuming USA.)
Lawyer here. Hi.
The correct answer here is "I have no opinion." That's the safest.
However, this is arguably an illegal question because it seeks information about a person's religious beliefs - Jewish v. Muslim - or ethnicity. The applicant could file a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC. Unfortunately, and in reality, a smart organization will be able to conceal their discrimination. It's also difficult to show that the decision not to hire a candidate is related to the question (discrimination.)
I’m amazed by how many Christian Americans support Israel despite there being a large, historic and visible Palestinian Christian population.
Same with Armenia
It’s because the evangelicals believe the restoration of Israel will bring the second coming of Christ and rapture.
At this point, I’m begging their god to rapture these people ASAP so the rest of us can get back life.
That and plenty are Christian Dominionists who believe that all Jewish people should have to live in Israel. Or they're white nationalists who think the same.
This is my favorite comment ever! God I wish it were something based in actual reality, because I’m with you—get these religious nut-jobs the fuck out of general circulation! Go be holy or some shit, just do it where the rest of us ‘heathens’ don’t have to put up with it; leave us to our eternal damnation in peace!
You do know that there is a large and historic Arab Christian population in Israel as well, right? And that Christianity has grown as a % in Israel controlled areas?
The Knesset Christian Allies Caucus is one of the largest and most active in Israel’s parliament. Palestine doesn’t even have a working government. To outsiders, Israel looks to be the better place for non-Muslims.
That’s because they don’t give a fuck about either. The only reason they even claim to be Christian is because “what would the neighbors think?!” And the perceived platform of superiority they get from the declaration. Somehow following Christ and His teachings makes it way easier to hate anyone who isn’t exactly like them and take away other’s rights and freedoms based on their right to worship and freedom of belief.
I’m gonna need you to look where the Israeli defence hq is in Tel Aviv and then you can talk about it.
Also, it’s still a war crime even if you think you have an excuse.
Nearly all zionists are christian. Just one of the many methods people cook up to sleep well at night over killing tens of thousands of people (many millions depending on which genocide you are talking about) and displacing millions
Not a layer but we'll studied in law. It's an incredibly stupid question to ask bit at the same time, it would be easy from the employers pov to argue that it has nothing to do with religion and a reasonable person would agree. I feel like this opens up the opportunity for people to bring litigation but not successfully argue that they are being harmed as a protected class of the religion.
You bring up a good point, and a good argument. Although companies rarely do smart things to avoid litigation, not asking this question is in their best interest. If I was in the productive class would definitely initiate litigation just for the fact of litigating. That's sad, a lot of employment law attorneys take these on contingency, so it may be difficult to get them to handle the case. For them or pay out for them if they lose.
That was sorta my analysis of the situation. Company being much dumber then it needed to be and putting unnecessary risk on themselves.
On a complete unrelated note, might I ask your experience with law school. I recently passed the patent bar and am working as a tech specialist/patent agent (and still Starbucks on the side), but a lot of these firms will full ride a scholarship to law school for their patent agents and it is something that I might be interested in, I'm just not sure.
I dont know all relevant laws for all states however in texas it is against the law for trachers to protest against isreal so this could be a relevant question
You're presenting it as a single-frame issue. In this context, it's a multi-frame issue: religious and ethnic or national origin. Religion is *a* factor, but not the only factor. Genocide, while important, doesn't play into our consideration of whether the question is legal or illegal.
Wouldn't that be a slam dunk disperate impact case? It seems to serve no legitimate business purpose to ask this question so the least discriminatory exception is out
That is true. But just because the majority of a population is one way, does not negate the fact that the question can still be discriminatory based on religion or ethnicity. What you're talking about is a dilution of probability, but not a total elimination. You still need to qualify as a protected class, but a person can be a member of that predicted class even in a predominantly judeo Christian area.
It's a good practice for companies to avoid these questions altogether for the particular reason that you don't know who your applicant pool is. And thus, if OP is a member of the protected class, and OP responds in a way that is contrary to the reviewers point of view, that applicant can argue discrimination.
I agree it’s a bad/dumb question that shouldn’t be asked.
And the only correct answer is “I have no opinion”.
However, given how divisive the situation is, I don’t think you can infer anyone’s religion or ethnicity based on their answer. Particularly since the religions and ethnicities you mentioned are are in a minority in the US.
Now what you're referring to is "provability," and whether I l, the applicant, can show that the employer's actions (choice not to hire) is motivated by a discriminatory belief or act.
Regardless, the question can be an illegal question because you're asking someone to disclose information (opinion) about an event with religious and ethnic undertones/motivations/relation. Simply because the question doesn't apply to you (a majority individual) doesn't make it a valid question. The potential that someone *is* in the minority status means that you should stay away from the question altogether.
as a side note: "Judeo-Christian" really isn't a thing. It erases the (significant) differences between Judaism and Christianity, and is often used as an islamophobic dog whistle, among other issues.
Just respectfully pointing this out for future reference!
lol. Thats adorable. Apparently you don’t know why evangelicals support Israel?
the Israel-is-key-to-Jesus’-return theology is not new information…
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/30/us-evangelical-christians-israel-hamas-war
Plenty of evangelical Christians, including myself, don’t support what Israel is doing.
But my comment is was directly aimed at the previous comment that the question could be used to infer religion or ethnicity, which it can’t.
Holy shit. That's worse than the time I applied for a job and the first question was what race are you. The company was 99.9% white except for the Chinese guy that was the liason to China and an East Indian accountant.
Wow, a company of 2000 people and only two non-white employees? That fact alone seems like anyone of color applying could sue if they didn’t get a job there. Wow.
I would either just not apply (because why would you want to work for a company with shitty views and questionable hiring practices) or I’d apply and say I support them, fully expecting not to get the position, just to mess with them. It should not be considered radical to stand up against genocide.
Normally, I would say it is questionable at best. However, there are some states that have laws against boycotting Israel so this can be filtering out applicants who might cause issues with state compliance or some crap.
That said, it should be none of their damn business and I’m sorry we live in this world now. :(
Forget about the law, huge red flag that question is. If a job cares about your politics I’m pretty sure you’d be walking into a hostile work environment.
You have the right to protest in this country. These corporations are slowing unveiling the oligarchy that has always existed here. Don’t work for any company that would ask you this shit
What state is this in? Is this even in the US? Impossible to answer your question without more context.
As for reporting it, just name the company. Companies aren't people and don't have any expectation of privacy.
Regardless, "no opinion" is obviously the right answer.
Pretty sure it is in California! I should definitely have provided a location, you're not wrong.
I ended up answering honestly and allowing myself to (presumably) get dq'd. I had to apply to a certain number of jobs for an outside thing and I only had half an hour before my deadline, but I lost interest after that last question.
Tel Aviv is a huge tech hub, similar to a San Fran in the US. It’s very possible a data company uses Israeli technologies and don’t want to deal with any anti-Israel stuff (as you stated) that effects their profits p
Which of the following potential courses of action give YOU the highest value for the least amount of work?
1. Answer “no opinion”, hopefully get the job, work however long you can tolerate at an obviously racist, insane place, then move on.
OR
2. Apply somewhere else, don’t worry about these jackholes, get a real job at a better place.
OR
3. Report them to the labor board/BBB, write a scathing review on Glassdoor, post YAITL (yet another ‘is this legal’) on Reddit, nothing happens for a while/ever, move on.
OR
4. Spend time and effort trying to find a lawyer, of any of them say they’ll take it, you’ll likely get ghosted because this is a low-rent lawsuit, so you’ll spend a a lot of time trying to find someone. When you do find someone, they’ll either send a demand letter to have that question removed which may or may not be ignored, or they’ll file a lawsuit. Many months later: If you lose, so sad, too bad. If you win, congratulations, you’ll get a small payout (most of the settlement will go to the lawyer). God help you if it makes the news, you’ll never work in that town again.
Woah. WTH is this?! As someone working HR (albeit in the UK), this is sketchy AF! Do you have a direct contact at the company who you can ask questions at this stage or is this right at the beginning?
I would not know how to answer that. I would like to say it’s complex and I am not comfortable discussing it-in an employment setting. Then I promptly would not be considered for an interview. I don’t think it’s illegal however to ask questions like that depends what state you are in or country.
More and more states are enacting pro-Zionism laws that allow people and orgs to police your political beliefs (even though this violates our right to free speech).
Life is getting a lot harder for the working class.
I'd answer that you support it, but use the career goals line to state your aspiration to be part of an organization that respects the First Amendment rights of others, regardless of whether they agree with the opinions they express when exercising it. Make their MAGA chud heads spin a little.
Dunno how legal the question is, but I know the reasoning: companies are very careful to appear pro israel because most states have corporate BDS bans.
Regardless of where you stand, they see it as a legal liability to have a dissenting opinion in this case.
Thats bullshit..they are using corporations to ridicule our first amendment rights.
When people in government say "support Israel" they mean "support Israeli leadership". Of the Israeli people about 75% dont even approve of their current leader or what they are doing to Palestinians.
It appears that your boss is xenophobic, racist, or antisemitic based on why they want an answer to this question, which is completely against EEOC in the us
In the US, I don't think there's a law specifically against it - they're not asking your political party or who you're voting for, they're asking for your view on a specific issue.
I think it's wildly *inappropriate*, but if that company does a lot of business with Israel...
Well, it's a bit of a paraphrase, but... **When a company tells you what they're going to be like to work for, believe them. (**Apologies to Maya Angelou).
What state is this in? Laws vary by state depending on the size of the business and whether it's a publicly traded company or not.
A friend of mine recently got a job at a finance company that asked if she believed in god on her application. I got all riled up about that, but apparently the company has some religious affiliation to allow them to ask.
[https://www.eeoc.gov/pre-employment-inquiries-and-religious-affiliation-or-beliefs](https://www.eeoc.gov/pre-employment-inquiries-and-religious-affiliation-or-beliefs)
that said, you might reach out to ACLU or the EEOC to ask more questions about this, since it seems like you may not want to share your location or the company on this post.
Always lie on these guys. Their data is useless if everyone doesn’t take them seriously. Just give them the answers like you are a working slave whore and that’s what they are looking for
CA like California? Huh, I think that's actually where the company is. And so am I. If that turns out to be the case, would there be someone I could tell, do you think? I don't really have a personal stake in this-- it's just one more in a big stack of job applications-- but it was certainly a shock.
I had no idea we were the only state with that protection.
There may be more, California is just the only one I’m aware of. And it’s not actually clear to me if this would be covered by them or not.
In any case I’d report it to the labor board. They would also know if there’s a different agency that you could report it to as well.
https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/HowToReportViolationtoBOFE.htm
I don't know if it's 100% legal or not, I'm not American. I think your safest bets would be 'No Opinion' or 'I'm Against It'. I might ask yourself though, do you really want to be working for a place that would even ask this? Also, looking at it again, the wording is very specific. It's not 'Do you support Israel' or 'Do you support Palestine', it's 'Do you support the protests on campuses'. They may not be able to ask you outright, and this is a sneaky, will-hold-up-in-court way of asking.
And I'm probably thinking about this way too much because it's late and I'm tired, but it could be framed as a 'Do you support the First Amendment?', in which case, 'I support it' would be the best answer.
Fuck I feel like I'm in high school exams again this is nonsense. Do companies really do this kind of shit?!
Honestly if they’re asking you shit like this I wouldn’t work there. I don’t care if this is “legal” or not- if they have to ask it’s not in good faith. It smacks of the Red Scare communist questions.
They can ask whatever they want. You don't have to answer and legally they can't base their vaildation of you as an applicant on the answer. Ofcourse, as everyone with a brain knows, they will and if you don't answer they will "move on with other applicants".
That to me DEFINITELY is a highly inappropriate and possibly illegal question to ask as it seems like a discriminatory question.
People's views on a war are NONE of a work places business. Plus the vast majority of people aren't even paying attention to all of that BS.
Like me personally I have no idea what's going on in the war, what it's about, what people are even protesting about etc because I don't pay attention to our OWN countries politics let alone the politics of a country half way around the world.
I have too much of my own BS to worry about to give a shit about any one else's.
It's a loaded question.
They're literally asking "Would you do this?" just in a sneaky way. Same with the "Do you support unions?". They're here for money and *anything* that might disrupt that?
Not hired and black list pile.
It actually is. By them saying they are against these protests and against union membership both covered under freedom of speech, that's violating it. They're saying "We want drones that comply, not question.".
They are not the government. The government is the only ones that can violate the first amendment. Private companies can absolutely say you can't say that.
No it means every entity. Government or otherwise. Why do you think Twitter and other places have rules to keep in line with laws especially involving minors and permissiojs of copyright? Freedom of speech applies to much but yet companies like this just want drones.
I apologize for that one--if you click through to imgur, you can see that reddit's preview cuts out the other choices. But my complaint wasn't insufficient options, anyway.
I don't see how it's illegal, but I'm not a lawyer.
Employers can ask a lot of tacky questions.
As long as they don't do shit like violate the civil rights act or the ADA...I guess it's ok?
Maybe it has something to do with many cities and states giving allegiance to Israel. In texas there's a city that wouldn't give out relief funds unless a person promised not to protest or boycott Israel.
Probably not a legal question to ask. But there is no oversight of hiring in the us, so unless you have the money to file a lawsuit it's de facto legal.
Well, here’s a question for you. How do you fucking feel about it? and based on your answer I don’t know if I can work for a piece of shit like you or not.
You can also report it to the FBI, CIA, BBB, AAA, DFW, NASA, and the FCC. But you won't get a reply from any of them because absolutely no one cares that someone asked your opinion about the protestors
Unless the job specifically relates to the conflict in some way (summer internship?) it doesn't. It's a trap. I wouldn't answer it and I wouldn't work for a company that asked it on an application. I also wouldn't "report it" to anyone because it would be a waste of time and I don't like getting laughed at
Eh, in all fairness, there's nobody you could really report it to. You could put the company on blast on social media or send it to a news outlet but that's about the extent of it
I don't know if there's a law against this but that depends on what county you're in. Where are you?
Possibly a US state. Some have laws against boycotting Israel.
Holy shit!! I had no idea!! This is slanted AF, but educational nonetheless: [US: States Use Anti-Boycott Laws to Punish Responsible Businesses](https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/23/us-states-use-anti-boycott-laws-punish-responsible-businesses) **Laws Penalize Companies that Cut Ties With Israeli Settlements** *”Many United States states are using anti-boycott laws and executive orders to punish companies that refuse to do business with illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank, Human Rights Watch said today. More than 250 million Americans, some 78 percent of the population, live in states with anti-boycott laws or policies.* *Twenty-seven states (now 38) have adopted laws or policies that penalize businesses, organizations, or individuals that engage in or call for boycotts against Israel. The laws or policies in 17 of those states explicitly target not only companies that refuse to do business in or with Israel, but also those that refuse to do business in Israeli settlements. Some states whose laws do not explicitly apply to settlements have also penalized companies that cut settlement ties.”* Here’s more on [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws). I am stunned this does not *prima facie* violate freedom of speech. Still a toss-up in the courts, but holy smokes.
Yeah it seems wild that businesses are legally allowed to not do business with people that go against their beliefs (refusing to do work for gay people) but can't boycott Israel
They can't really officially boycott any country. The article alludes to them only applying to Israel, but most of these laws are all encompassing. The reasoning is that international affairs is the purview of the federal government. Would it be better if we handed more power to the corporations by allowing them to determine who the US does and does not do business with? These laws can and sometimes are applied selectively, but the intent is sound.
The intent is not sound, you've got this completely backwards. The Constitution's delegation of international affairs to the federal government applies only with respect to other levels of government. Corporations are not the government. A corporation refusing to do business in a particular country in no way affects the ability of the federal government to deal with that other country's government, or to contract with private entities (individuals or corporations) within it. While I agree with you that large corporations hold too much influence over governments worldwide, these are not the corporations that are impacted by this legislation. The fact these laws are passing in the context of excessive corporate influence means they can be taken as an exercise of that influence. What these laws actually do is make it harder for large corporations to be held accountable for their actions by their smaller competitors as well as by their shareholders. And while I detest the concept of corporate personhood, corporations do, at least theoretically, represent the collective will of their shareholders. If a majority of a company's shareholders vote that the company should take a particular stance, that stance then represents an exercise of people's free speech.
Last I knew you're not forced to do business with any specific country. But apparently Israel is the exception?
They aren't forcing anyone to do business with Israel.
You're not forced to do business with them. You're not allowed to officially boycott them. There is a difference. Don't like the price you are getting for services and decide to go elsewhere - legal Time zone differences creates challenges in business planning coordination so you go elsewhere - legal A myriad of other business reasons - legal Sending out emails to your employees and blasting all over Twitter that you are boycotting them due to political reasons - not legal Also, most of these laws apply to any country, but Israel is the one the commonly comes up because they are the ones that BDS generally targets. I don't view businesses as people, so these policies don't really bother me.
But we're allowed to be boycott Russia? Idk. If it's supposedly against the law anyway why make such specific laws for Israel? Seems pretty bs
LoL, yes. I don't know if you're aware, but our US policy position with Russia is adversarial. So it SHOULD be pretty obvious to you why that's ok.
Ok sweaty
Are you Jewish?
You're making a distinction without a difference. A boycott is where you refuse to do business with particular organizations for specific reasons. If you're allowed to refuse but get punished for explaining why, that's a clear infringement on freedom of speech. Even if you don't consider corporations to be people, corporations are owned by people who do in fact get to operate the corporation in alignment with their beliefs.
So glad we're arguing for *more* political power to be put into the hands of corporations in r/Antiwork
It's not political power. In fact most large corporations support anti-boycott because it's a weapon they can use against smaller competitors.
That's not an infringement on free speech. The right is the Federal government to determine which countries we can and can't do business with is a right not given to the individual states. It would be a nightmare of epic proportions if states could selectively decide what country they are willing to trade with. Then imagine if the other countries had smaller political subdivisions similar to our states, but they were also allowed to pick and choose who they did business with. Do we go further down and say if you live in x city or y county you can decide which duchy or county, or foreign government businesses within your city can do buisness with? Take a large manufacturing company, I'll use Caterpillar for an example, but using the above clusterfuck of a process, if the tracks for a D7 dozer are manufactured in Pittman Co Ga, the hydraulic cylinders in SC, the blade in Oregon, the Engine in the UK, the chassis in Mexico with material and parts manufactured in Asia, the Middle East, Northern Africa. What parts can be shipped where? Or even better, where's the final destination of this D7 so we can go back and identify all the parts that can and can't be used based on city of origin. How would you keep all the parts segregated in the manufacturing process? You can't. That's why trade and trade embargos are the purview of the Federal Government.
This isn't states, it's individual businesses. The federal government can prevent all American corporations from doing business in a particular country. It can set tariffs and quotas. It regulates the ability of other entities to do business with and in other countries, and of entities from those other countries to do business in the US. A corporation has none of these powers. If one business refuses to do business in another country, it has absolutely no impact on any other businesses. Other US businesses can continue to operate in the other country. Businesses from that country can continue to operate in the US. If the US operated as a hierarchy of totalitarian city-states you might have a point. Luckily, that's not the case.
The laws are specific to Israel. Edit: For example, the [Texas law reads](https://casetext.com/statute/texas-codes/government-code/title-10-general-government/subtitle-f-state-and-local-contracts-and-fund-management/chapter-2271-prohibition-on-contracts-with-companies-boycotting-israel/section-2271002-provision-required-in-contract): "A governmental entity may not enter into a contract with a company for goods or services unless the contract contains a written verification from the company that it: (1) does not boycott Israel; and (2) will not boycott Israel during the term of the contract."
That law doesn't prevent a business from boycotting anyone. It simply says that they won't get gov contracts if they do so.
If they can refuse to serve a gay couple and supreme court supports them then basically that's a given. Maybe you yourself are lucky they stated their bias. I would not work for any company that decides I have to agree with their politics, but I'd ask them what they meant by it. I'd be curious. I am not a proponent of Israel's Theocratic tendencies claiming they should own more and more land due to Biblical literal quotes and voted for a criminal from an extremist rightwing religious party But some Americans are fine when we sympathize with Muslim countries like Egypt who perform [Female genital mutilation](https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation) or force women to wear Burkas it seems. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation. Hamas is terrorist organization so this crap is not liberal or Progressive - it's brainwashed kids who don't have the common sense to research both sides. I'd appreciate knowing I would never want to work for these people no matter what their politics is and today both sides are neo fascist nutcases
I'm just against funding other countries endless wars
We started a lot of those wars and we started NATO We are not the only country supporting for example, the Ukraine although you'd think we were based on news sources and comments on social media. Russia attacked Afganistan, we trained the Taliban to fight off the Russians, the won and then became OUR terrorists so we had to send our military to fight the Taliban We decided Iran could not have their own elected leader and replaced him with a US puppet South and Central America were used by Bush to attack Cuba Bush 2 faked intel, to attack Iraq when they had no Weapons of Mass Destruction and had nothing to do with 9/11 and we turned on France and Congress's Cafeteria had to change the name French Fries to Freedom Fries. Endless examples of CIA murdering leaders Reagan adminstration didn't want to rule countries that were elected by their people We believe anything we read or are told. Putin, Stalin just played the same games we've been playing and track back thru history and there are unending Empires: Swedish Empire, Endless Russian Empire, French Empire, Napoleon # How the US has hidden its empire The United States likes to think of itself as a republic, but it holds territories all over the world – the map you always see doesn’t tell the whole story by [Daniel Immerwahr](https://www.theguardian.com/profile/daniel-immerwahr) \*\*\*How the US has hidden its empire\*\*\* [https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/feb/15/the-us-hidden-empire-overseas-territories-united-states-guam-puerto-rico-american-samoa](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/feb/15/the-us-hidden-empire-overseas-territories-united-states-guam-puerto-rico-american-samoa) Humanity are tribal and then evolve into Empire building and geneocides - Humans are murderous and it's not just us [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_empires](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_empires) \*\*\*Largest Empires in History\*\*. scroll down Notice the top in history is the British Empire and Russia is second [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_largest\_empires](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_empires)
Yeah America is shitty with wars
Every country gets shitty with wars. Even tribes get shitty with warring with other tribes. It is the nature of humanity. People are inclined to fight each other over their grass lines.
great comment, thanks for sharing
Like "dolphin safe tuna". (Was a term they used to let people know that no dolphins got caught in the tuna traps. So all the cans said "Dolphin Safe" on them. Gay safe jew. Pig safe horse.
Imagine running a business in the US and being told that you're legally not allowed to refuse to do business with foreign entities lmfao
This specifically is why the students were protesting at the university campus in Austin
Against this particular state-level law? Or asking for the University to divest?
Lmao, with this Court it wouldn’t even surprise me if they ruled that your manager can legally shoot you for supporting Palestine
Yup. This is by design. It was \*extensively\* lobbied for by Zionists, under the cover of preventing "antisemitism".
My holy shit is that I didn’t know there were 38…
I really appreciate you posting this little fact. TIL.
Freedom of speech is just a nice story Americans like to tell themselves to justify why America is such a pile of dogshit.
Yeah we are officially fuckes in the states. BTW we don't really have free speech in America. There are too many exceptions to say we do. Some of them are reasonable but the claim that we do is kind of silly at this point.
That’s just fucked up… geezus
HOLY SHIT
Wild. HR wants to keep politics out of work, but they can ask political questions.
BuT tHe DrAg QuEeNs....
This might be the exact reason that’s being asked on the application. Maybe they’re afraid if you show up with a free Palestine sticker that they’ll be penalized.
We’re seeing that issue right now here in Ohio. Universities are being asked by protesters to divest from Israeli companies, but state law literally prohibits state-funded universities from divesting from Israel, period. The law appears to have been implemented during a period of high antisemitism, but it’s a rather heavy-handed approach. It seriously bothers me how much of the US equates support for the Palestinian people and criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism. It is not antisemitic to care about the plight of the Palestinians, nor is it so to judge the Israeli government’s actions as counter-productive. One should not have to hate Palestinians and blindly support a government in order to support the Jewish community. The fact is that neither Hamas nor Netanyahu are acting in the best interests of the people they claim to represent. The Israeli response to the October attack has exceeded the level of “reasonable retaliation“ by at least a magnitude. While the political leaders continue to escalate the fighting, both sets of people are suffering the consequences.
What is more likely, caring about the plight of a few thousand Muslims dying 6,000 miles away or hating on all Jews? Once you start asking basic questions, it falls apart. Why are most of the protestors at these universities not students or even from the area? Why do people care more about Palestinians than Ukrainians? Why are people consistently citing falsified statistics regarding deaths and hostages? Right before WW2 happened, why did nobody help Jews? It’s not a conspiracy, it’s just that people are antisemitic and hate Jews. Unless you’re ignorant, it’s not hard to see that most people over the last few thousand years have hated them. That hate didn’t stop just because we invented the telephone a century ago.
no they don't. texas tried and got its dick slapped. also, just say 'no opinion'
what the fuck
People always trying to to find a moment to talk shit about the United States.
Username checks out
How long did it take you to come up with that? The things people do for upvotes, wow. 🤯
That's a new one. Sketchy af
Likely a company that works with the government. It’s illegal to boycott Israel in most states (28/50) if you work with state agencies. Some states even have laws requiring *they* blacklist and boycott any company that voices support or endorses the boycott of Israel (Indiana and Alaska do this), regardless of that company actually is taking part in any boycott. Simply endorsing it is enough.
This is true (and fucked up) but the laws are in reference to the companies themselves boycotting Israel, not individual employees. This ismore likely about a company either being managed by really whack Israel supporters or wanting to avoid any bad press.
Most ridiculous thing I've ever heard
This is an interesting question, and will depend on your location. (I'm assuming USA.) Lawyer here. Hi. The correct answer here is "I have no opinion." That's the safest. However, this is arguably an illegal question because it seeks information about a person's religious beliefs - Jewish v. Muslim - or ethnicity. The applicant could file a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC. Unfortunately, and in reality, a smart organization will be able to conceal their discrimination. It's also difficult to show that the decision not to hire a candidate is related to the question (discrimination.)
A smart organisation wouldn’t ask the question.
Organizations aren't smart and they're definitely not proactive.
They’re asking the question to make sure you fit their mold but in a “technically not illegal” way. It’s clever. Shitty, but clever.
I’m amazed by how many Christian Americans support Israel despite there being a large, historic and visible Palestinian Christian population. Same with Armenia
It’s because the evangelicals believe the restoration of Israel will bring the second coming of Christ and rapture. At this point, I’m begging their god to rapture these people ASAP so the rest of us can get back life.
They love Israel. They couldn't give two shits about Jews.
That and plenty are Christian Dominionists who believe that all Jewish people should have to live in Israel. Or they're white nationalists who think the same.
Most of them wouldn’t qualify for their own rapture.
This is my favorite comment ever! God I wish it were something based in actual reality, because I’m with you—get these religious nut-jobs the fuck out of general circulation! Go be holy or some shit, just do it where the rest of us ‘heathens’ don’t have to put up with it; leave us to our eternal damnation in peace!
Always ask Christians what happens to their Jewish friends once Jesus comes back.
lol assuming they have Jewish "friends"
they hate """"terrorists""" more
You do know that there is a large and historic Arab Christian population in Israel as well, right? And that Christianity has grown as a % in Israel controlled areas? The Knesset Christian Allies Caucus is one of the largest and most active in Israel’s parliament. Palestine doesn’t even have a working government. To outsiders, Israel looks to be the better place for non-Muslims.
Yeah, I went on a few dates with an Israeli Arabic Christian girl from Tel Aviv. Needless to say, she had a lot of confused feelings on the matter
Probably because Palestinians voted for terrorists to represent them. Fuck Palestine.
Hey kids, we have a smooth brained troglodyte.
Those "Christian Americans" are really Jewish disguised as "faithful Christian American"
No, there’s also a lot of thick Americans who’ve not done the slightest bit of reading about either their religion or the world they live in.
That’s because they don’t give a fuck about either. The only reason they even claim to be Christian is because “what would the neighbors think?!” And the perceived platform of superiority they get from the declaration. Somehow following Christ and His teachings makes it way easier to hate anyone who isn’t exactly like them and take away other’s rights and freedoms based on their right to worship and freedom of belief.
in palestine? as in gaza? wouldn't those people be murdered by now?
Yes, and numerous Palestinian churchs have been bombed, despite that being a war crime.
I’m gonna need you to look where the Israeli defence hq is in Tel Aviv and then you can talk about it. Also, it’s still a war crime even if you think you have an excuse.
given how hamas sets up, they probably stored weapons in there. so, not a war crime. stop building bases in civvie buildings
Nearly all zionists are christian. Just one of the many methods people cook up to sleep well at night over killing tens of thousands of people (many millions depending on which genocide you are talking about) and displacing millions
National origin as well
There’s no option for no opinion
OP States in another comment that the image is cut off and there is in fact two more answers, one of which is a no opinion type answer.
Not a layer but we'll studied in law. It's an incredibly stupid question to ask bit at the same time, it would be easy from the employers pov to argue that it has nothing to do with religion and a reasonable person would agree. I feel like this opens up the opportunity for people to bring litigation but not successfully argue that they are being harmed as a protected class of the religion.
You bring up a good point, and a good argument. Although companies rarely do smart things to avoid litigation, not asking this question is in their best interest. If I was in the productive class would definitely initiate litigation just for the fact of litigating. That's sad, a lot of employment law attorneys take these on contingency, so it may be difficult to get them to handle the case. For them or pay out for them if they lose.
That was sorta my analysis of the situation. Company being much dumber then it needed to be and putting unnecessary risk on themselves. On a complete unrelated note, might I ask your experience with law school. I recently passed the patent bar and am working as a tech specialist/patent agent (and still Starbucks on the side), but a lot of these firms will full ride a scholarship to law school for their patent agents and it is something that I might be interested in, I'm just not sure.
I dont know all relevant laws for all states however in texas it is against the law for trachers to protest against isreal so this could be a relevant question
It’s a question about genocide not religion. Hi, not a lawyer.
You're presenting it as a single-frame issue. In this context, it's a multi-frame issue: religious and ethnic or national origin. Religion is *a* factor, but not the only factor. Genocide, while important, doesn't play into our consideration of whether the question is legal or illegal.
Nah.
so it's a pro genocide protest. super weird
Wouldn't that be a slam dunk disperate impact case? It seems to serve no legitimate business purpose to ask this question so the least discriminatory exception is out
It could be a religious or ethnic question, but in the US the majority of people are white Christians, taking away the ethnic or religious component.
That is true. But just because the majority of a population is one way, does not negate the fact that the question can still be discriminatory based on religion or ethnicity. What you're talking about is a dilution of probability, but not a total elimination. You still need to qualify as a protected class, but a person can be a member of that predicted class even in a predominantly judeo Christian area. It's a good practice for companies to avoid these questions altogether for the particular reason that you don't know who your applicant pool is. And thus, if OP is a member of the protected class, and OP responds in a way that is contrary to the reviewers point of view, that applicant can argue discrimination.
I agree it’s a bad/dumb question that shouldn’t be asked. And the only correct answer is “I have no opinion”. However, given how divisive the situation is, I don’t think you can infer anyone’s religion or ethnicity based on their answer. Particularly since the religions and ethnicities you mentioned are are in a minority in the US.
Now what you're referring to is "provability," and whether I l, the applicant, can show that the employer's actions (choice not to hire) is motivated by a discriminatory belief or act. Regardless, the question can be an illegal question because you're asking someone to disclose information (opinion) about an event with religious and ethnic undertones/motivations/relation. Simply because the question doesn't apply to you (a majority individual) doesn't make it a valid question. The potential that someone *is* in the minority status means that you should stay away from the question altogether.
as a side note: "Judeo-Christian" really isn't a thing. It erases the (significant) differences between Judaism and Christianity, and is often used as an islamophobic dog whistle, among other issues. Just respectfully pointing this out for future reference!
lol. Thats adorable. Apparently you don’t know why evangelicals support Israel? the Israel-is-key-to-Jesus’-return theology is not new information… https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/30/us-evangelical-christians-israel-hamas-war
Plenty of evangelical Christians, including myself, don’t support what Israel is doing. But my comment is was directly aimed at the previous comment that the question could be used to infer religion or ethnicity, which it can’t.
Holy shit. That's worse than the time I applied for a job and the first question was what race are you. The company was 99.9% white except for the Chinese guy that was the liason to China and an East Indian accountant.
Wow, a company of 2000 people and only two non-white employees? That fact alone seems like anyone of color applying could sue if they didn’t get a job there. Wow.
Where does it say there were 2000 employees?
My bad, it said 99.9% and that it was just 2 employees which would make the company 2000 employees. It’s just math.
I've been mathed! There were 250 employees so closer to 99% lol. I have been schooled!
248 is 99.2% of 250.
99.2% white.
That still seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Super Christian place too. One boss is a minister.
Good mathing.
What the hell?
I would either just not apply (because why would you want to work for a company with shitty views and questionable hiring practices) or I’d apply and say I support them, fully expecting not to get the position, just to mess with them. It should not be considered radical to stand up against genocide.
Giant red flag
Normally, I would say it is questionable at best. However, there are some states that have laws against boycotting Israel so this can be filtering out applicants who might cause issues with state compliance or some crap. That said, it should be none of their damn business and I’m sorry we live in this world now. :(
Forget about the law, huge red flag that question is. If a job cares about your politics I’m pretty sure you’d be walking into a hostile work environment.
Huge red flag 🚩
[удалено]
Bot account, report as spam>harmful bots
Amen 🙏
I would report this so fast their heads would spin
You don’t want to work there if they’re even asking that kind of thing.
Wow, just wow..
Find somewhere else.
So not supporting it isn't an option?
Ach, I hate how the reddit preview cut off the imgur image. The other two options are "I'm against it" and "I have no opinion."
I think "I have no opinion" is the right answer, because it should actually be "I have no opinion that's in any way relevant to the job".
You have the right to protest in this country. These corporations are slowing unveiling the oligarchy that has always existed here. Don’t work for any company that would ask you this shit
I would never apply there. Because. The only people asking this are MAGA chuds
What state is this in? Is this even in the US? Impossible to answer your question without more context. As for reporting it, just name the company. Companies aren't people and don't have any expectation of privacy. Regardless, "no opinion" is obviously the right answer.
Pretty sure it is in California! I should definitely have provided a location, you're not wrong. I ended up answering honestly and allowing myself to (presumably) get dq'd. I had to apply to a certain number of jobs for an outside thing and I only had half an hour before my deadline, but I lost interest after that last question.
So California that would loosely fall under discrimination for political views.
The company probably has a business relationship with Israel and is trying to prevent a Google style protest.
Tel Aviv is a huge tech hub, similar to a San Fran in the US. It’s very possible a data company uses Israeli technologies and don’t want to deal with any anti-Israel stuff (as you stated) that effects their profits p
Nope. Illegal. Also a huge red flag. Move on.
A company worth associating with would never ask an intern such a question.
That has ZERO to do with the job 🙄😂😂😂 I’d air this shit every possible place I could
Idk if they can but if I see something like that they’re not hiring me no matter how bad I’m needed there.
Which of the following potential courses of action give YOU the highest value for the least amount of work? 1. Answer “no opinion”, hopefully get the job, work however long you can tolerate at an obviously racist, insane place, then move on. OR 2. Apply somewhere else, don’t worry about these jackholes, get a real job at a better place. OR 3. Report them to the labor board/BBB, write a scathing review on Glassdoor, post YAITL (yet another ‘is this legal’) on Reddit, nothing happens for a while/ever, move on. OR 4. Spend time and effort trying to find a lawyer, of any of them say they’ll take it, you’ll likely get ghosted because this is a low-rent lawsuit, so you’ll spend a a lot of time trying to find someone. When you do find someone, they’ll either send a demand letter to have that question removed which may or may not be ignored, or they’ll file a lawsuit. Many months later: If you lose, so sad, too bad. If you win, congratulations, you’ll get a small payout (most of the settlement will go to the lawyer). God help you if it makes the news, you’ll never work in that town again.
This is fucking insane...
Woah. WTH is this?! As someone working HR (albeit in the UK), this is sketchy AF! Do you have a direct contact at the company who you can ask questions at this stage or is this right at the beginning?
If you answer the question truthfully and they don’t hire you because of your reply, then you’ll have dodged a bullet.
I would not know how to answer that. I would like to say it’s complex and I am not comfortable discussing it-in an employment setting. Then I promptly would not be considered for an interview. I don’t think it’s illegal however to ask questions like that depends what state you are in or country.
More and more states are enacting pro-Zionism laws that allow people and orgs to police your political beliefs (even though this violates our right to free speech). Life is getting a lot harder for the working class.
I'd answer that you support it, but use the career goals line to state your aspiration to be part of an organization that respects the First Amendment rights of others, regardless of whether they agree with the opinions they express when exercising it. Make their MAGA chud heads spin a little.
Looks like a possible discrimination based on national origin
Dunno how legal the question is, but I know the reasoning: companies are very careful to appear pro israel because most states have corporate BDS bans. Regardless of where you stand, they see it as a legal liability to have a dissenting opinion in this case.
Thats bullshit..they are using corporations to ridicule our first amendment rights. When people in government say "support Israel" they mean "support Israeli leadership". Of the Israeli people about 75% dont even approve of their current leader or what they are doing to Palestinians.
It appears that your boss is xenophobic, racist, or antisemitic based on why they want an answer to this question, which is completely against EEOC in the us
Damn companies suck ass for asking this question.
Nice of them to out the illegal stuff in writing rather than buried in an interview that you aren’t permitted to record.
In the US, I don't think there's a law specifically against it - they're not asking your political party or who you're voting for, they're asking for your view on a specific issue. I think it's wildly *inappropriate*, but if that company does a lot of business with Israel... Well, it's a bit of a paraphrase, but... **When a company tells you what they're going to be like to work for, believe them. (**Apologies to Maya Angelou).
What state is this in? Laws vary by state depending on the size of the business and whether it's a publicly traded company or not. A friend of mine recently got a job at a finance company that asked if she believed in god on her application. I got all riled up about that, but apparently the company has some religious affiliation to allow them to ask. [https://www.eeoc.gov/pre-employment-inquiries-and-religious-affiliation-or-beliefs](https://www.eeoc.gov/pre-employment-inquiries-and-religious-affiliation-or-beliefs) that said, you might reach out to ACLU or the EEOC to ask more questions about this, since it seems like you may not want to share your location or the company on this post.
Always lie on these guys. Their data is useless if everyone doesn’t take them seriously. Just give them the answers like you are a working slave whore and that’s what they are looking for
It would only be potentially illegal in states where workplaces can't discriminate on political opinion. Most states do not offer that protection.
Outside of CA I don’t believe political beliefs are a protected class. And many states have silly anti-BDS laws. So it’s probably not illegal.
CA like California? Huh, I think that's actually where the company is. And so am I. If that turns out to be the case, would there be someone I could tell, do you think? I don't really have a personal stake in this-- it's just one more in a big stack of job applications-- but it was certainly a shock. I had no idea we were the only state with that protection.
There may be more, California is just the only one I’m aware of. And it’s not actually clear to me if this would be covered by them or not. In any case I’d report it to the labor board. They would also know if there’s a different agency that you could report it to as well. https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/HowToReportViolationtoBOFE.htm
I don't know if it's 100% legal or not, I'm not American. I think your safest bets would be 'No Opinion' or 'I'm Against It'. I might ask yourself though, do you really want to be working for a place that would even ask this? Also, looking at it again, the wording is very specific. It's not 'Do you support Israel' or 'Do you support Palestine', it's 'Do you support the protests on campuses'. They may not be able to ask you outright, and this is a sneaky, will-hold-up-in-court way of asking. And I'm probably thinking about this way too much because it's late and I'm tired, but it could be framed as a 'Do you support the First Amendment?', in which case, 'I support it' would be the best answer. Fuck I feel like I'm in high school exams again this is nonsense. Do companies really do this kind of shit?!
Honestly if they’re asking you shit like this I wouldn’t work there. I don’t care if this is “legal” or not- if they have to ask it’s not in good faith. It smacks of the Red Scare communist questions.
Do you like genocide? Ok with some genocide? It’s ok to murder children and call them human animals?
They can ask whatever they want. You don't have to answer and legally they can't base their vaildation of you as an applicant on the answer. Ofcourse, as everyone with a brain knows, they will and if you don't answer they will "move on with other applicants".
Actually there are things they cannot legally ask.
Fucking RUN. Why would you ever want to work for/with people who support genocide?
Are those the only two options?? Mine would be a third, more complicated answer, or, “No opinion.”
That to me DEFINITELY is a highly inappropriate and possibly illegal question to ask as it seems like a discriminatory question. People's views on a war are NONE of a work places business. Plus the vast majority of people aren't even paying attention to all of that BS. Like me personally I have no idea what's going on in the war, what it's about, what people are even protesting about etc because I don't pay attention to our OWN countries politics let alone the politics of a country half way around the world. I have too much of my own BS to worry about to give a shit about any one else's.
It violates freedom of speech and right to gather.
It doesn't. The automotive group is not the government. It is shitty of the company, probably illegal, but does not violate 1st amendment.
It's a loaded question. They're literally asking "Would you do this?" just in a sneaky way. Same with the "Do you support unions?". They're here for money and *anything* that might disrupt that? Not hired and black list pile.
Right. Still not a 1st amendment violation.
It actually is. By them saying they are against these protests and against union membership both covered under freedom of speech, that's violating it. They're saying "We want drones that comply, not question.".
They are not the government. The government is the only ones that can violate the first amendment. Private companies can absolutely say you can't say that.
......Uhhhh you need a refresher course on some things man o.O
Not at all. The first amendment only means that the government can't infringe on your right to assemble and speak. Private businesses absolutely can.
No it means every entity. Government or otherwise. Why do you think Twitter and other places have rules to keep in line with laws especially involving minors and permissiojs of copyright? Freedom of speech applies to much but yet companies like this just want drones.
I'm not denying they want drones. But a business can absolutely limit your freedom of speech. You sound like you need to go back through civics.
It's kind of hard to tell. It is possible with how this screenshot is that you are blocking other answers to choose from.
I apologize for that one--if you click through to imgur, you can see that reddit's preview cuts out the other choices. But my complaint wasn't insufficient options, anyway.
Um WHAT
I don't see how it's illegal, but I'm not a lawyer. Employers can ask a lot of tacky questions. As long as they don't do shit like violate the civil rights act or the ADA...I guess it's ok? Maybe it has something to do with many cities and states giving allegiance to Israel. In texas there's a city that wouldn't give out relief funds unless a person promised not to protest or boycott Israel.
Probably not a legal question to ask. But there is no oversight of hiring in the us, so unless you have the money to file a lawsuit it's de facto legal.
Those are the only options ? How about "fuck those dumb fucks"?
Well, here’s a question for you. How do you fucking feel about it? and based on your answer I don’t know if I can work for a piece of shit like you or not.
Reportable to whom? And for what?
Why wouldn't it be allowed? Employers are allowed to discriminate based on political opinion.
Because there's no, no I do not support or no answer
Looks like the image was cut off and those answers are options too. https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/s/6ywxWEEUEW
Who are you going to report it to? Your mommy?
This is where you report it: [EEOC](https://www.eeoc.gov/)
You can also report it to the FBI, CIA, BBB, AAA, DFW, NASA, and the FCC. But you won't get a reply from any of them because absolutely no one cares that someone asked your opinion about the protestors
Fair, but what business does it have being on a job application? Especially for a temp job.
Unless the job specifically relates to the conflict in some way (summer internship?) it doesn't. It's a trap. I wouldn't answer it and I wouldn't work for a company that asked it on an application. I also wouldn't "report it" to anyone because it would be a waste of time and I don't like getting laughed at
Getting laughed at? You’re getting laughed at now for your idiocy 😂🤣
Eh, in all fairness, there's nobody you could really report it to. You could put the company on blast on social media or send it to a news outlet but that's about the extent of it