It wouldn’t get anywhere in the US. Age is the closest protected class, but only applies to over 40 in the US. Discrimination based on month and day of birth isn’t actually illegal.
I honestly think there’s a gray area here and it’s worth talking to a lawyer if anything. There are certainly some protections for peoples under 40. Being denied a promotion because you’re “too young” is certainly a protection. The catch is you have to prove it.
This case is easy to prove though if there are any laws over this.
Edit: but now that I think about it, this is only really a protection if you’re already hired at the place. If you just slam the door on people before they can get in, discrimination seems to be legal.
I believe it’s legal in the US to pass someone over for promotion because they’re too young. The only protected class related to age is being over 40 (potentially different in some states).
but now that I think about it, this is only really a protection if you’re already hired at the place. If you just slam the door on people before they can get in, discrimination seems to be legal.
Pretty sure that protection so applies to the application process. Can’t have places rejecting every non-white candidate for being the wrong race. The problem is proving that you were rejected for a BS reason is really hard because they usually don’t flat out say it, and especially not in writing
Being denied a promotion because you’re “too young” is certainly a protection.
It’s not actually. Age protections really do only apply to old people. If the person in the post is over 40 though, and got rejected for their birthday, they could probably at least get the company to overturn the rejection. Not sure how well they’d do in court. Most of this stuff doesn’t get enforced well, and that one is already a stretch
Not hard to extrapolate a case from this. Imagine a landlord refusing to rent because you’re a “scorpio” or an employer turning you down because they’re looking for a “dog” person.
Agreed. A lot of people in this thread are confusing what they believe should be illegal discrimination with what is actually illegal discrimination. Or they believe discrimination laws are more broadly encompassing than they are. There are a lot of kinds of discrimination that most of us agree is bad and shouldn’t be allowed… but unfortunately is not illegal.
Exactly. And though there are protected classes at the federal level, there are also some at the state level and they vary. I’m in California, and we have more than most. If you’re a business owner or manager, you have to know what they are where you are or it can be really bad.
It wouldn’t get anywhere in the US. Age is the closest protected class, but only applies to over 40 in the US. Discrimination based on month and day of birth isn’t actually illegal.
I honestly think there’s a gray area here and it’s worth talking to a lawyer if anything. There are certainly some protections for peoples under 40. Being denied a promotion because you’re “too young” is certainly a protection. The catch is you have to prove it.
This case is easy to prove though if there are any laws over this.
Edit: but now that I think about it, this is only really a protection if you’re already hired at the place. If you just slam the door on people before they can get in, discrimination seems to be legal.
I believe it’s legal in the US to pass someone over for promotion because they’re too young. The only protected class related to age is being over 40 (potentially different in some states).
Pretty sure that protection so applies to the application process. Can’t have places rejecting every non-white candidate for being the wrong race. The problem is proving that you were rejected for a BS reason is really hard because they usually don’t flat out say it, and especially not in writing
It’s not actually. Age protections really do only apply to old people. If the person in the post is over 40 though, and got rejected for their birthday, they could probably at least get the company to overturn the rejection. Not sure how well they’d do in court. Most of this stuff doesn’t get enforced well, and that one is already a stretch
Whelp, time for arson then. Sorry, it’s the rules.
What about star sign? That’s got to be illegal, and it’s p close to this
They listed the protected classes. Which one is astrology?
Yeah yeah not protected, but same could be said for requiring blond hair or blue eyes. Still discrimination
I am not a lawyer
They did specifically list genetics
How is that different from any other accident of birth that can’t be changed? People really do discriminate based on when you were born:
Not hard to extrapolate a case from this. Imagine a landlord refusing to rent because you’re a “scorpio” or an employer turning you down because they’re looking for a “dog” person.
Bad things, but not illegal
Agreed. A lot of people in this thread are confusing what they believe should be illegal discrimination with what is actually illegal discrimination. Or they believe discrimination laws are more broadly encompassing than they are. There are a lot of kinds of discrimination that most of us agree is bad and shouldn’t be allowed… but unfortunately is not illegal.
Exactly. And though there are protected classes at the federal level, there are also some at the state level and they vary. I’m in California, and we have more than most. If you’re a business owner or manager, you have to know what they are where you are or it can be really bad.
Yeah more of a case for public shaming or filing a complaint or even just an honest Glass Door review
Because requiring blond hair and blue eyes would, by definition, exclude people based on race.
Not necessarily true, but 100% discrimination based on genetics, which is a protected class.
Yeah bad example. I’m on break at work
And that’s probably for the better.
Tell me how you really feel why don’t you