WANT AD TERMINOLOGY

Ethel · May 2004

What do PC terminology do you use to indicate that an individuals responding must be legal to work in the USA?????

Pork · May 2004

Foreign Nationals must be legally permitted to work in the USA. I have not had the opportunity to apply this statement to any classified ad. However, I have used this statement to the Foreign Nationals, who have submitted a resume to our WEB Page "employment opportunity" notice on our web page.

PORK

Don D · May 2004

To be absolutely politically correct, why not use the exact same language that appears above the individual's certification signature on the I-9?

Ethel · May 2004

You're right, that I-9 statement is PC, but it's also wordy and the per word cost is prohibitive. Guess I was looking for a short, slick PC statement that would let us get off cheaper.

Don D · May 2004

"ABC requires employment background check, physical/drug screen and proof of right to work in United States."

Or shorten it to read, "Requires Drug Screen and Proof of Right To Work in United States".

Maybe the most politically correct of all would be, "This company does not support undocumented migration".

None of those will impact your process, however, and using any of them will be a waste of your money. It is a fact that the ethnic communities in every American city, town and burg know and communicate to others which employers in the area do or do not vigorously enforce the requirements of the law. Illegals aren't going to come to you through your newspaper ad, no matter what the ad says. Today's 'underground railroad' starts at the unguarded border and leads straight to the doors of the employers who blink at the process and who support governmental ethnic pandering.

(Note: The above is only my opinion and is not intended to offend any person or group. It is directed only at violators of the law.)

JM in ATL · May 2004

Don:

Please enlighten me. What is governmental ethnic pandering?

Definition of Pander: To cater to the lower tastes and desires of others or exploit their weaknesses.

Inyour opinion, what weakness is the government exploiting in illegal workers?

ritaanz · May 2004

You are joking, right?

Don D · May 2004

In the context of illegals, the government, both Democrats and Republicans, is pandering to ethnic groups in order to garner support (votes). The pandering is promulgated through the non-enforcement of our border security laws and the blind eye turned to the existing laws of the land regarding legal immigration. Using the definition you provided, it fits nicely that both parties are 'catering to the desires of others'. Grey Davis was the nation's most visible 'governmental ethnic panderer' and was turned out of office, in part, due to it. No presidential aspirant has the cajones to enforce the border security laws for fear of losing the Hispanic vote. Pat Buchanan, a recent blip on the radar, was the last to vocally support enforcement of our border security.

You may also notice that every four years, precisely one year prior to election time, all of the aspirants, including the incumbent, begin to sermonize that they are in favor of 'excusing' all of the current illegals who have jobs and giving them permanence. The catch-22 to that is the sudden and immediate massive influx of even more illegals when they learn of that announcement, thinking they too will be excused and welcomed into the tent.

The above is fact, not opinion and not political spin either way. No lectures, please, about people wanting to work and jobs going untaken without them and whose granddaddy came from where. I'm talking here about the laws of this nation being ignored by the violators and the enforcers through Governmental Ethnic Pandering.

JM in ATL · May 2004

Don:

Although I agree with you, I think it is quite the opposite.

We do not exploit their weaknesses, they exploit ours. They know that the fat, lazy, spoiled Americans will not work the jobs that require physical duties. So, they flood our borders by the semi-truck loads looking for those jobs b/c they KNOW we will give the job to them for as little money as we can possibly get away with. And of course the gov't turns a blind eye b/c they know that those illegals are votes and taxes.

If you really look at it, it is our weakness that is being exploited. Our weaknesses being greed, greed and more greed. We can turn higher profits by paying them less and although they don't file W-2's at the end of the year, we still get some taxes from them throughout the year, not to mention sales tax.

So I guess it is the term governmental ethinic pandering I don't agree with. Illegal workers pander the US gov't just as much as the US gov't panders illegal workers. They feed off of each other using what they can to their advantage. Nobody is a victim or a villian, it is purely a partnership, and even though that partnership may not be 50/50, they still use each other to get what they want. But that is just my opinion.

Sorry to hi-jack the thread....

Ethel · May 2004

Thanks Don, your 2nd suggestion did it for me. (Proof of Right To Work in United States".) This is what we are using. Appreciate your help.

System · May 2004

We don't use terminology in our ads, but on our application we ask 'Are you a US Citizen or have permanent resident status? (Yes & No check box) (Proof required at hire).

Don D · May 2004

If that is the language on your application, you are in violation of the law. There are other eligible individuals who are neither permanent resident status nor US citizens.

TLC Shelly · May 2004

Our ads don't mention it. They do refer applicants to call, and we go over the requirements, including eligibility for work. In addition, applicants sign a statement which includes the following: "If employed, I will be required to complete an Employment Verification Form (I-9), and within three days show satisfactory evidence of identity and employment eligibility."

WANT AD TERMINOLOGY

Comments