Work Camping Employment Discrimination

[BTFT]

Just for the record, those of you who respond to me by calling me names, insulting me and mocking me, the one thing you cannot do is provoke me.


I have been provoked by experts with no effect.


These kinds of responses are of no real consequence to me and honestly only hurt the poster.



So keep in mind that no matter how hard you try I will not rise to the bait. I will remain steadfastly polite or at least civil in all my responses.

[BTFT]

Originally Posted by grindstone01

I am amazed in the hyprocrocity of the OP and his following post.

Originally Posted by grindstone01

I'm sure it would be a heated conversation. At age 61, I would not fit into the OP's IVR2 stereotype group and would probably be subjected to severe discrimination from the OP.

I think you may have the OP (me) mixed up with JBRV. As I am a 66 year old white male my bet is I fit into a rather large percentage of the IRV2 members.


But if I am wrong that you have mixed us up please feel free to quote my text and make your case.


And just so we are all on the same page about meanings:
hy·poc·ri·sy
/həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

[tizzyfit]

The simple reality, if you're a workcamper and need employment, you provide the necessary information the employer requests. Should you choose not to, don't expect a call back from the employer. See how easy that is?

[masdixdragon]

Meh....people can provide the pictures if they're inclined to...even naked ones... if they think it will help...your choice

[kenautoone]

Call me crazy ,call me curious.....but... what is the real issue with you not submitting your picture ?

[Old-Biscuit]

BTFT wrote:
While I am sure nothing I say here will change you into a person who believes in non-discrimination


BTFT wrote:
Dear OldBiscuit, nothing in the statement above written by me has anything discriminatory in it what so ever. And I assume that you are intelligent enough to know that very well and are just trying to provoke.


Dear BTFT---
I did NOT post to 'provoke'
Simply showing how 'we' ALL discriminate daily
Your state that "nothing I say here will change you into a person who believes in non-discrimination" is an assumption based on YOUR Bias and perceptions that I/others 'believe in discrimination' in the first place

That in and of itself is 'discriminatory.


You have had 4 years of ignoring 'discriminatory employment practices' and want to question me/others that wonder WHY?
Sorry but I really think this thread was meant to 'provoke'



Bye-bye

[tizzyfit]

Originally Posted by kenautoone

Call me crazy ,call me curious.....but... what is the real issue with you not submitting your picture ?

"the guy said this face art would wash off with soap and water" and the hillbilly dentist insisted once he extracted my teeth, they'd grow back just like they did when in elementary school.

[Jake21]

I suggest y’all read this if interested in discrimination in the workplace. i find it interesting:
https://www.natlawreview.com/article...iscrimination-

[jbrv]

Originally Posted by kenautoone

Call me crazy ,call me curious.....but... what is the real issue with you not submitting your picture ?

Because of what it used for. Anyone not knowing that a photo required to be provided up front is not asked for to screen for full face tats or gauges (those big ear holes) or other odd stuff like wears makeup like mimi from the drew carey show is naive. They are used to screen out the "unwanted" applicants from the start. Them real old folks who may or may not be physically able to perform the duties, We can jusge from a photo right? the young couple who will be put aside right away because if they are young and workamping they must be flaky drug addicts who cant hold a real job, or the black couple who, well they are black, the mixed race couple, the hispanic couple, the same sex couple. It also happens to be against the law to not hire based on that information.

A photo provided after the interview to confirm that the folks you hired are not circus freaks with face tats or a bearded lady or what not is fine. It wont be a problem because any smart employer had made appearnce standards known to the possible employee ahead of time and anyone not meeting that wont bother or will not be shocked when the offer of employment is withdrawn because of that.

I was applying for season work with UPS. Since i started full time rving i have grown my hair a bit longer and dont shave regualry. The UPS job was clear on apperance standards during the application process. So when i went to the interview i knew to get or keep the job i needed to have my hair neatly put up and be clean shaven. Simple and easy. I put the hair up neat and shaved the standard 50 year old man gotee off. Requesting a photo up is npt needed for that. Anyone saying it is is most times just tryng to provide a smoke screen to cover up the real reason it is done.

[jbrv]

Originally Posted by Old-Biscuit

BTFT wrote:
[I]W
Sorry but I really think this thread was meant to 'provoke'

Nothing wrong with provoking a discussion about a practice.

One might arugue this is a discussion board with a Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.

it kind of the point of the site aint it?

So it not whats the last thing you bought for your rig or you fav potluck recipe or what brand tires should i purchase or whatever it still a discussion and it is rv related. For some it might shine a light on someting they just never even considerd to be a problem for whatever reason. Maybe at the end of the day some find what they thought was ok challenged and rethink and maybe see how they themselfs have been hurtful ( Or broke the law) to others and not even known they did and some are better people for it.

Maybe the next add posted the person going to post it sees this thread and decides it would be a bad idea to request a photo up front and rewrites the add before they post.

[stepside454]

Here is my resume . My name is :
Jonathan
Shanequa
Barbara
Juan
Nahvi
Jahmal
Lopez
You get the idea.
Can you discriminate ? Without a photo ? Yes

[yzfyoung]

I hope everyone can find something better to do tomorrow then to spend time writing the crap I just read. Go outside and polish your RV.

[BTFT]

Originally Posted by Old-Biscuit

BTFT wrote:
While I am sure nothing I say here will change you into a person who believes in non-discrimination


BTFT wrote:
Dear OldBiscuit, nothing in the statement above written by me has anything discriminatory in it what so ever. And I assume that you are intelligent enough to know that very well and are just trying to provoke.


Dear BTFT---
I did NOT post to 'provoke'
Simply showing how 'we' ALL discriminate daily
Your state that "nothing I say here will change you into a person who believes in non-discrimination" is an assumption based on YOUR Bias and perceptions that I/others 'believe in discrimination' in the first place

That in and of itself is 'discriminatory.


You have had 4 years of ignoring 'discriminatory employment practices' and want to question me/others that wonder WHY?
Sorry but I really think this thread was meant to 'provoke'



Bye-bye

Old Biscuit, your post is proof that truth is often the first casualty.



My statement is not an assumption. It was based on ample proof that you and several others provided in your posts...your words tell the story. And again you choose to conflate the two very distinct definitions of Discrimination for no other purpose but to obfuscate the real problem here.


So if I am wrong I will readily admit it. Just post an unequivocal statement of your belief in non discrimination in employment as enshrined in US Law.


Second your assumption that I have been doing nothing about it for four years is amazing since you do not know me or have any inclination of what I do or have not done.


I dare say that you are not one to accuse me of making assumptions.


But worse than your assumption is your inability to read my post as written. No where do I claim to have seen these ads for four year. I only state that I have been work camping for four years.


Here is what I actually wrote:


I have "Work Camped" for the last 4 years. Some have been typical workcamping jobs some have been not so traditional as in working as a driver-guide for Holland America/Princess Alaska.


But in my research for workcamping jobs I continually run in to employers who ask for a personal photo to accompany an application.


They are two separate statements, two separate paragraphs. And meant to be read that way. Could I have been more precise? Yes surely. Could you have asked a question before making assumptions? Most definitely.



So with all due respect if you are going to accuse and criticize the least you can do is read the post carefully, correctly and get it right. Or ask me to clarify.


But the real question hanging over all of this is what is it that you have such a problem with in me pointing out this issue? I am simply talking about the US Federal Law, supported by numerous Supreme Court decisions which has been long considered settled. This is the law of the land backed up by many many court decisions in every state of the Union and by the Supreme Court. So please tell me...What is the problem with pointing out those that are in violation of it in an industry that most of us deal with regularly?

[Tetonchief]

Originally Posted by yzfyoung

I hope everyone can find something better to do tomorrow then to spend time writing the crap I just read. Go outside and polish your RV.

I'm with you!