Best and worst crimes for employment?

[garbon]

Anyway, in Poland, the law sets out the type of information the employer can ask the employee to provide - and asking for, storing or processing other types of information is illegal (and can result in fines). This includes for example criminal record except for jobs that expressly call for no criminal record (such as police officers, state prosecutors, people handling guns or cash etc.).

I guess there is something Poland is better at than US. 

We also have regulations on what employers can ask. Also when I was reviewing Euro CVs - it seemed like applicants were much more likely to list things we never would - like marital status.

[DGuller]

Anyway, in Poland, the law sets out the type of information the employer can ask the employee to provide - and asking for, storing or processing other types of information is illegal (and can result in fines). This includes for example criminal record except for jobs that expressly call for no criminal record (such as police officers, state prosecutors, people handling guns or cash etc.).

I guess there is something Poland is better at than US. 

We also have regulations on what employers can ask. Also when I was reviewing Euro CVs - it seemed like applicants were much more likely to list things we never would - like marital status.

I was referring to the criminal record part in this particular case.  I thought the context was obvious enough to not have to point it out, given how I just discussed at length the American laws about protected classes.

[Admiral Yi]

I'm a little surprised that an actuary is arguing in favor of the suppression of information.

[dps]

Anyway, in Poland, the law sets out the type of information the employer can ask the employee to provide - and asking for, storing or processing other types of information, especially sensitive information, is illegal (and can result in fines). This includes for example criminal record except for jobs that expressly call for no criminal record (such as police officers, state prosecutors, people handling guns or cash etc.), sexual orientation, religion, political views, medical record etc.

How do you not store or process information that is voluntarily stated by an applicant during an interview?  That's sort of like a law making it a crime for me to get wet if someone spills water on me.

[The Brain]

How do you not store or process information that is voluntarily stated by an applicant during an interview? 

[Capetan Mihali]

It's a stupid law.  Why shouldn't employers be allowed to know some fuckup was dishonorably discharged?

Weren't gay people prior to repeal of DADT dishonorably discharged?

I think it was a general discharge.

[sbr]

Anyway, in Poland, the law sets out the type of information the employer can ask the employee to provide - and asking for, storing or processing other types of information, especially sensitive information, is illegal (and can result in fines). This includes for example criminal record except for jobs that expressly call for no criminal record (such as police officers, state prosecutors, people handling guns or cash etc.), sexual orientation, religion, political views, medical record etc.

How do you not store or process information that is voluntarily stated by an applicant during an interview?  That's sort of like a law making it a crime for me to get wet if someone spills water on me.

How does a jury disregard information it shouldn't have seen or heard?

[DGuller]

I'm a little surprised that an actuary is arguing in favor of the suppression of information.

Why?  As an actuary, I understand that discrimination can actually be rational, which means that market forces wouldn't make it disappear.  As a human being, I think some forms of discrimination are too socially damaging to be worth the predictive power discrimination provides.

[MadImmortalMan]

The employer wasn't seeking said info and the applicant voluntarily supplied it? That's what we're discussing right? It is nice to say that such voluntary admissions have no influence, but that's unrealistic, no?

Besides you and Marti's suggestion seems to be that people volunteered any of that above info should be disqualified. Should someone be disqualified for saying they have kids/are disabled/are gay?

I wonder if applicants sometimes think that if they blurt out the info you will be afraid not to hire them because you don't want to discriminate against them for it. Or maybe so they can accuse you if you don't.

[dps]

Anyway, in Poland, the law sets out the type of information the employer can ask the employee to provide - and asking for, storing or processing other types of information, especially sensitive information, is illegal (and can result in fines). This includes for example criminal record except for jobs that expressly call for no criminal record (such as police officers, state prosecutors, people handling guns or cash etc.), sexual orientation, religion, political views, medical record etc.

How do you not store or process information that is voluntarily stated by an applicant during an interview?  That's sort of like a law making it a crime for me to get wet if someone spills water on me.

How does a jury disregard information it shouldn't have seen or heard?

Do the jurors really disregard it?

[Admiral Yi]

Whenever dps and sbr get into a discussion I have a helluvatime keeping track of who's who.

[DGuller]

Do the jurors really disregard it?

I guess if it went something like this:

Defendant:  "I stabbed her because that cheating bitch deserved it."
Prosecutor:  "Objection!  That's speculation!"
Judge:  "Sustained.  Please disregard that comment."

Then it's probably hard to disregard it.  However, if it was a minor comment that doesn't seem to be apparently revealing, then the jury would probably forget about it as they go on deliberating.

[DGuller]

Whenever dps and sbr get into a discussion I have a helluvatime keeping track of who's who.

I thought I was the only one.

[Razgovory]

I always confuse dps with Derspeiss.

[CountDeMoney]

Bah, you can find out easily enough what type of discharge a vet received;  it's on their DD-214, which employers require from veterans as proof of their service.  It's not a state secret or anything.  Says exactly what kid of discharge it was, along with the discharge code.