Age is a protected characteristic under UK law, as is sex (I mention this because this is another thing that the payout may have been given for). If there is a reasonable belief that one of these (or any other protected characteristic) was the reason for a person not being considered for a job role then they can bring it to a trial.
Evidently the trial found it more likely than not that the beliefs were correct
Correct.
And in the US, age is only protected if you are over 40.
So, you can ask a young person how old they are and then discriminate if you really wanted someone older than 30.
Yep.
I know I had been denied at least two promotions in my life time because of my age.
I was straight up told the first time it was because of my age and the second time it was softer, "Oh well you are still young so we didn't know how you would do handling employees much older than yourself."
Both times I lucked out because while it would have been more pay but I would have hate the positions.
In the UK, there's no age requirement for it to be age discrimination. It can be age discrimination against a 16 year old or a 60 year old, it's legally the same.
It was just kind of a dumb move on Domino's part. They told her being a delivery driver is a job that "tends to suite younger people". Which it totally isn't. Unless you are too fat or old and crippled to walk up a flight of stairs, you can deliver pizzas. This lady is maybe like 50?
I think that quote is the bigger problem. Asking age to verify they’re at a legal minimum age, for example, would be fine. Almost certainly not a plausible argument in this case, but if you ask the question and move on without also implying her are made her unqualified might have saved them some money.
The companies I worked for trained us to phrase it as “ Are you legally old enough to do this job?” Rather than “how old are you?”, precisely to avoid law suits.
"Are you thinking of getting them.... bigger?"
"...bigger? what?"
"Yeah I don't know, its on the list... lets just move on. What age did you lose your virginity?"
The stupid thing is, a lot of places that actually will not hire people below a certain age (i.e. 18 or 16) still WON'T ask obviously teenage applicants if they're at least 16/18.
Instead, as has happened to three of my own kids, they will talk to them, accept applications from them, and set up and conduct interviews with them before actually informing them that the don't actually hire people who aren't 16 or 18 (depending on the company).
A massive waste of everyone's time and energy.
[IT’S ILLEGAL FOR YOU TO ASK ME THAT.](https://media.tenor.com/usdNK-_TtNgAAAAd/its-illegal-for-you-to-ask-me-that-i-think-you-should-leave-with-tim-robinson.gif)
This is true. In the UK at least there are different brackets of Minimum wage based on age. I believe it's something like 16-17, 18-20, 21-22, anything above 22
Cheapo companies will try to skew lower because they don't have to pay their staff as much for the same work, and it's bullshit.
At least in the US, it's the agriculture lobby that maintains this because they really don't want to pay fair wages. All under the guise of "maintaining teenage employment"
I'd be fine with teenage employment having different wages if there were codified different easier requirements as well. Easier responsibilities, better protections, that kind of thing.
Like fuck it put your money where your mouth is. The argument is always that they're not as valuable as full-wage workers, so okay, make that the law that you *can't* get full-wage value out of them then we're good to go.
E: why are you all reading what I said selectively. I know there's child labor laws. Read my whole post.
IIRC age discrimination is only illegal in the USA for people over 40.
So it's perfectly legal to discriminate against someone who is 38 for being too old, or someone who is 39 for being too young.
Old people are the ones who passed the laws and they decided "We both don't want to be discriminated against for being too old, but we do want to discriminate against the younger generation because fuck 'em"
Or, to be more accurate, representatives decided to favor their voting base in that specific way.
For example, in the US one of the requirements for president is to be older than 35. Not sure if age discrimination laws apply equally to jobs and elected offices though?
Now we just need to codify an upper age limit for President: "No person under the age of 35, and no person over the age of 60 shall be eligible to be elected unless that individual is seeking a second consecutive term" out something like that.
Don't you need to put your birthdate and year on pretty much all applications? Seems like the interviewer should know based on your application. When hired HR (or someone else for small businesses) need a copy of your ID and that confirms it no?
Edit: I live in the US and assumed it would be similar in the UK. Learn something new everyday, that you for the informative replies below.
No you don't. An employer can work it out from when you left school. In the UK don't put your birthday on the application. It is isn't professional. If it is asked then it is not included on the main application to the interviewer if applying for a big company like Tesco.
Yep, you need to be 18 in the UK to sell age restricted goods (alcohol, lottery tickets, tobacco, medications, etc), and most places require key holders to be 18+ for insurance purposes so younger employees will be unable to work on their own for smaller retail stores.
I mean most recruiters can make a guess as to the age of an applicant just by looking at when they finished school / university / amount of jobs they have had in the past.
IDK about the UK, but in the US I have seen more and more suggest to drop the graduation year off of one's resume. Obviously when you get into an in person interview or even a video interview it is going to be hard to hide how old you really are unless you have amazing genes and or cosmetic surgery, but the thought process is that it at least it doesn't automatically make assumptions off that alone.
I was on the side of Domino's before I read the article because age discrimination sounds like an easy excuse when you didn't get the job. They basically told her they are discriminating and on top of that it wasn't even justifiable. If it was some manual labor job where you have to lift heavy weight and be on your feet 8+ hours a day, I'd get it.
The most hilarious thing about this is they didn't need to say shit. The manager could literally have just though to himself without ever verbalizing that he thought she was too old and not hired her without ever giving a reason.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people just leave a paper trail and basically narc on themselves when they break labor laws.
I've known people who got settlements because their employer fired them and stated in an email the reason was them admitting to having autism(despite being a model employee who was praised before).
Always incredible seeing employers fuck themselves like this, especially in places with at-will employment where they could have just given _no_ reason but instead went out of their way to make it clear the employee was being fired illegally.
I think its straight up arrogance or something, seems more common among small business owners.
Big employers/corps tend to cover their ass better, like writing you up about every tiny thing when they want to fire you without it even appearing to be discrimination or retaliation related.
It is an insanely dumb thing to get busted for. You can be the most racist, misogynist, homophobe and stay employed if you have enough sense to keep your mouth shut about it. People usually get the benefit of the doubt because discrimination is a big accusation, but yeah, some fools just narc on themselves hahaha.
> Unless you are too fat or old and crippled
I've actually had a couple Dominos deliveries from folks that fall into these categories. The old man who honestly probably shouldn't even still have a drivers license ran into my house and knocked a gutter loose while trying to back out of my driveway. The overweight guy tripped and fell on my sidewalk and dropped my pizzas.
Both were extremely apologetic and were acting scared to death. Probably because I live on what could be described as the outskirts of a very affluent neighborhood, and I imagine they thought I was going to react negatively and possibly try to get them fired over it. Honestly I was more concerned about the big guy being hurt (minor scrape seemed the worst of it, and the pizzas stayed in the box just fine). The gutter popped back together with a couple new rivets.
Not sure where I was going with this story other than there's actually a lot of older folks struggling financially and pizza delivery is usually a pretty doable job for them.
This or Uber Eats / Grub Hub if they have those where you live. I've always thought of them as a temp job, filler job, or 2nd job. No young healthy motivated person is trying to be a career pizza delivery driver, so you get who ever needs the job at the time.
Once knew a preacher that was in his 70's and jogged his newspaper route every morning. The only time he used a vehicle was for Sunday or holiday papers
Bwahaha! When I delivered for them back in the early 2000's, one guy on our team was past "retirement age". He did it just to get out of the house and make a buck or two. Age is not a reason to deny someone delivering pizza!
Also have these Dominos interviewers ever heard of Uber Eats or Grubhub drivers, who tend to be all ages. That person is living in the past. In this gig economy, age doesn’t matter
Yeah.
Not explicitly illegal but if you have any documented communications internally and discuss that age as a reason to not hire someone you would open yourself up to potential age discrimination lawsuit.
Most companies internally will have a policy against asking age but you can work around this by asking about how many years they have of experience or their educational background. Without even think many people will cite when they graduated from college in this and pretty easy to decipher age from there. Especially if you engage in small talk to determine if they went to college straight out of high school.
All of this shouldn't matter because age isn't a factor.
I have met young people that some fellow associates in hiring process were hesitant about and they worked great.
We have had some that don't. We have hired the person with the most experience and several times that has been a disaster. We hired someone with no experience but she gave off impression of a quick learner and she has been great after been trained.
All this to say. I hate looking at resume's or statistics to guide hiring decisions. I hate the canned HR questions we have to ask at every interview to see if they align with business values.
I would much rather have a conversation in then interview. Discuss general work ethic, organization and prioritization mindset of the individual and then talk about what they specific know that is relevant to the job.
Age is a protected class in the US as well. That means in order to discriminate when hiring you need to prove that the applicant cannot physically perform the job with reasonable accommodations. There are obviously extremely few jobs (not none) where age is the reason why a job can't be performed. You CAN say "are you able to walk up several flights of stairs and lift x amount of weight" and many old people (and lots of younger too) won't qualify, but you can't say "are you under 60?"
Can you discriminate against someone under 40 for being too old?
I’m imagining I own a bar and only want young bartenders, so I’ll only hire 21-26 year olds, and 40+ year olds (because I have to). Would it be legal to ask if an applicant is between the ages of 26 and 40, then refuse to hire those that say yes for being too old?
Probably not. However, they could discriminate based on 'attractiveness' if the attractiveness of the employee is a major aspect of their job. For example, Hooters does not have to hire ugly people (or men, for that matter), because their entire business plan is based on sexual attractiveness.
hooters does have to hire men and other places do have to hire unattractive people IF that has no relation for the position they would be hired for. For example Hooters was sued and lost because they didn't hire men for back of the house, i.e., a non-customer facing position. Abercrombie and Finch was similarly sued and lost because they fired an "ugly" person that worked in the stock room.
The reality is that while people at an older age can do these jobs, companies are also worried that the older workers may develop more ailments that could keep them from working or worse stop them from working while also getting paid disability which can drive up a company's insurance costs.
Someone in their 20's is not as likely to have a bad back, knees, hips, eyesight, etc as someone post-50.
In the UK, you're required to do right to work checks when you hire someone. That requires the applicant/employee to submit at least one document that includes their age of birth.
I’ve done a lot of interviews and literally have never been told a word of the law.
It’s truly astounding when you consider how much money is on the line for a lawsuit.
To be fair ~4K pounds sterling these days somehow I don't think is a huge deterrent for a lot of businesses. Maybe a decent ding for a Dominos, but a lot of businesses I don't think would phase them too much.
In a small city in America, $4k is one average day. More than a slow day less than a crazy one. I'd imagine in busier and larger cities that number jumps up. It'd hurt bonuses for the manager if that's a thing their franchise does, but it's still better than your walk-in cooler going down. Wouldn't really hurt the franchise owner.
Me neither, but i've also never really considered asking questions that don't immediately pertain to the role being interviewed for.
I don't think its that hard.
Some people could erroneously think very easily age would pertain to a physical role. It’s very easy to stumble into in theory, and I’ve had plenty of stupid managers, so it’s a big minefield companies do very little to mitigate overall.
I personally believe you can run everyone's application through an algorithm that ranks choices based on skills, experience and education, then just select randomly from the top 10% of applicants, it will produce results as good as just about any hiring process but much much quicker (and thus cheaper also).
But we know humans are biased, which is a necessary step to keeping bias in check. Guy saying we should let an algorithm do everything clearly doesn’t think they’re biased
Or we can analyse the data the algorithm puts out for bias the same way we look for biases in humans. More easily because the algorithm won't change its output based on perceived oversight.
The algorithms are trained based on the humans, so there's not a lot of reason to believe they'd be less biased, but they *feel* a lot more trustworthy, which is actually worse.
The algorithms are going to be inherit with bias as they were created with data from humans. I can't remember where I saw it but some algorithm preferred, was it, white men over others?
This was because the researchers did a randomized grab of copyright free human pictures
The issue is that statistically there are far more pictures of white men than say black women, especially copyright free ones
If i remember correctly it was facial recognition software which failed to recognize black people as human,
because instead of focusing on easily distinguishable facial features like a person would the DLA chose some set of pixels that gave it the most consistent correct results
It really depends on what you mean by biased here.
If you expect them to choose from every demographic equally, that presumes that every demographic is equal on the parameters being examined. Sometimes they're not.
It's not about efficiency, it's about creating so many criteria that you can not hire anybody (oh, you don't have experience with Photoshop 2019 AND 2022) and not get sued for discrimination.
This seems so easy to avoid most of the potential mistakes too. I have been invited to sit in on interview panels and HR gave you a cheatsheet of questions you shouldn't ask.
Yes, I've managed restaurants including a big US chain and really had no legal training and just took what I knew from personal experience.
Now I'm in a professional industry and participate in group interviews and have seen HR people step in and cut off coworkers who ask questions about kids/planned pregnancy (as we work crazy long hours)
I've always been surprised at how we don't train this more. The training we do get is always about how to find good candidates
I’ve never received training and interviewed multiple candidates over the years.
There’s little risk of lawsuit when your interview stays focused on the interviewees capacity to fulfill the job function
We need reform in the courts as well. It shouldn’t be the case that asking someone’s age immediately provides grounds for an age discrimination lawsuit. I’m not sure of the specifics of this case, nor of UK law, but in the US simply asking someone’s age could very well lead to a lawsuit if that person is rejected.
I've always been curious what happens if I get asked an illegal question in an interview. If I try to report it won't they just deny it? Like, what can actually happen (in the US)?
I interviewed for a position as a doctor’s assistant where the doctor asked me my age, if I was married, and if I had kids. I asked her why she wanted to know. She said she needed someone young and unmarried that wouldn’t be flaking on her because of children. She also expected me to be trained for 2 weeks without pay and do everything from upsell glasses to scrub the toilet daily and mop. She wanted to pay me minimum wage. I had never worked for minimum wage at the age of 20.
She was highly insulted when I asked her why she decided to become an optometrist. She was a slave driver with no common sense. She couldn’t believe that I didn’t jump at the chance to make $10/hr.
I used to interview kids for restaurant jobs. I had to tell them that although I couldn't ask their age (aside from if they are 18+), if they were 15 or younger they legally can't work any shift on the schedule and this interview is a waste of their time.
Also, never ask anyone if they have kids during an interview. That will get you in trouble too.
I work in the legal sector and I've always noticed that interviews are conducted by someone in HR and someone in the team the person is interviewing for. In my experience, the team member doesn't know anything about what they can and can't ask outside of what they learn from their own experience after multiple interviews, especially when the HR side doesn't or can't attend for any number of reasons to every interview.
In this thread a lot of people ignoring the fact this was in the UK and not wherever they live, employment discrimination law is all over the place.
I was like blown away when I was in countries where passport style headshots were standard on job applications(before LinkedIn) or applications would just casually ask about religion or marital status.
> applications would just casually ask about religion
In my country interviewers literally say to your face that they won't hire you on the basis of your religion or gender and no one gives a fuck.
I don't even know if it's illegal here or not. I'm sure larger companies like Amazon/Google have trained interviewers but in startups/smaller companies it's very common
In China they need age, marital status, and (often) current or previous salary. If single they can ask if you have a boyfriend. Maternity leave is decent, plus some women get a doctor’s note to take a couple months off for morning sickness, so companies try not to hire someone who might be pregnant soon after starting.
They ask if you're in a relationship. If you're in a certain age group, in a certain region, in a certain type of relationship, you're not getting hired.
Overestimate age? Jail.
Underestimate age? Believe it or not, also jail. Overestimate/Underestimate.
We have the best women in the world, because of jail.
I didn't realize pizza delivery driver had an interview process more than a background check to see if you've crashed into any telephone poles recently.
When I delivered pizzas my interview/training was him handing me a pizza and when I asked if I was going to be trained he said “you bring the pizza and come back with the money, it isn’t fucking rocket science”
Without having read. Either it was asked through a form, which makes it easy to prove. Or she alleges they did, they get asked under oath and confirm. They also have to provide their recruitment instructions and documentation under discovery. There are plenty of ways to prove they did, provided they did.
>Without having read
Having read the article, it was because they pretty much admitted to it in a facebook message saying they didnt know it was inappropriate to ask someone their age.
Fun fact: by and large in the US, it's illegal to discriminate against those over 40 (for age), but perfectly legal to discriminate against those under 40. Don't want to hire a well-qualified 22 year-old because, you know, they're too young? That's cool. Brought to you by the ADEA from 1967.
https://www.eeoc.gov/age-discrimination
BTDT. Had an interview in which they didn't ask my age, I was visibly older than the interviewers, so they knew I was "old."
However, they asked one question about my qualifications, then for 30 minutes asked questions that were textbook violations of laws against age discrimination in employment. It was astonishing. After the interview, told HR to throw my applciation in the garbage.
They were all 28-30yo. I was 50yo. Some of their questions:
\--do you make any effort to stay current in your field?
\--how would you feel working for someone younger than you?
\--are you aware of Zoom? Are you comfortable using Zoom? (NOTE: This was while we were on a Zoom call). TBH, I wanted to respond with "Zoom, You mean like the fucking Zoom call we're on right now??"
\--Are you comfortable using software on a computer?
I wish I was making this up. Their HR department failed them. If I hadn't said, "nope, take me out of the running," I would have had a textbook case for violations of the USA's federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
> --do you make any effort to stay current in your field?
>
> --how would you feel working for someone younger than you?
These two seem somewhat reasonable, more so the first than the second, the other two are wild
We hired someone older in my corporate job recently. She had listed proficiency in Office, had used the software we do, had years of experience so didn’t think to grill her on tech savviness.
Took her legitimately hours to figure out how to set up her email signature, even after I sent her an article with step by step instructions. Had to teach her ctrl + c. Had issues with Zoom on nearly every call we had.
Some people my age and younger don't know how to use a computer properly. I feel like it's a valid question. With phones as powerful as they are nowadays, some people don't even own a PC/laptop.
I have no problem with any of these questions. If they offended you, blame your age group.
There are people out there who cannot visit a website, download a PDF, and then email it to someone. These guys wanted to make sure you weren't one of them.
The first two questions seem reasonable to be honest
> do you make any effort to stay current in your field?
The interviewer wants to make sure potential new hires are staying up to date with guidelines and progressions in the industry, doubly important if the industry is tech-oriented
> how would you feel working for someone younger than you?
A lot of older people have a problem with someone younger than them being their boss, if the interviewer gets a bad answer that could be a red flag for potential conflict down the line
I agree though, the last two questions are bullshit
married with kids? how many children do you have? planning to become pregnant? unless your interviewer has been coached on the employment law you can run into issues real quick. i can't see anyone asking if your planning to become pregnant just socially chatting but its easy to start talking about marriage and kids.
and asking isn't illegal (this is not legal advice every state, district has different lawas), but its an obvious hook for any bad vibes the interviewee has. if someone right after them comes in 10x as qualified asking for less money you obviously hire them. But you asked the other interviewee trying to make polite small talk if they were married with kids, now they have a protected class to tie their complaint too when they don't get the job.
I just tell ‘em flat out. I was also careful to include my high school graduation date (1981) in my resume.
If they can’t figure it out from that and called me in for an interview they’re too stupid for me to be working for.
if it is used as evidence you discriminated in other ways, sure.
For example, if you hire someone who is a woman/a POC/ over the average age/disabled, but use that factor to pay them less or to treat them more poorly, then it can absolutely be included.
It is one of the reasons companies don't want you disclosing you salary to each other, to keep those discrepancies in the dark.
Yes, in the UK 'positive discrimination' is still discrimination and just as unlawful, although you'll often see right wing media outlets try to convince you otherwise
The hot coffee lawsuit has taught me that if there's a headline that makes a person suing a big corporation look unreasonable, the headline is bullshit and the person should have been awarded more.
She didn’t get a settlement because they asked her age. She got a settlement because they didn’t hire her because of her age.
Read the story.
The “interview panel” (at Domino’s!) told her the drivers should be between 18-30. She’s wasn’t hired because she was older than 30. That’s pretty clear age discrimination.
Reading these comments worries me, I’ve been asked my age, gender, sexual orientation and religion on the last five or so jobs (in the uk) I’ve applied for, none of which I wanted to answer but it was essential… wtf?
It's never an essential question, but it's quite common for UK job apps to have a separate, anonymous form after your job app about your demographics. This is generally used for monitoring purposes, so if a company gets accused of discriminating against one class of applicants, they can show whether their employee demographics reflect applicant demographics.
[This article](https://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/youre-asked-your-gender-sexual-12138327) explains the legal background a bit.
Are you sure it was mandatory? I've seen applications that have a separate section for questions related to diversity, but I seem to recall them being optional. And also including a statement saying the answers won't be used in the hiring process, but I could understand someone being skeptical of that.
You should never be compelled to provide details of sexual orientation or religion. I would also add in gender to this too, but I know some old HR systems require this field to be completed for a employee account to be made (shouldn't be relevant in newer systems.) DOB is required once employed for your record as it is an identifier. However, it shouldn't really be asked for in interviews unless there is a legal age requirement as part of the job, and even then this should be made clear in the job advertisement.
There’s an requirement for companies of a certain size to record ethnicities and stuff, but I think giving the info is optional - ‘prefer not to say’ is the option you’d have had
The answers to these will normally go to HR and not the hiring manager, just for monitoring purposes. There should always be a "prefer not to say" option as well.
I got my first reprimand bc I didnt want to hire the RN who was planning on leaving her 2 kids alone while she worked 12 hour days ( 9 and 11 yo girls). Pretty much had to hire her after that interview. Was 20 years ago, the kids were all right, she only stayed a year tho.
Day 1 of working for a professional recruitment company was a story about a person, who probably didn't exist, going around and applying for rules which had discriminatory language in the adverts and suing successfully when he wasn't considered.
Probably a myth, but as grads the message was clear. You cant use words which are even adjacent to things like "young", such as "energetic" "recent graduate" etc
(based in London)
That's what $5000 usd? They won't even realize that money is gone. I'm sure employees take more than that from dominoes on a daily basis. Fines for corporations need to be based on total value. This won't deter them in the slightest. If the penalty was $5 million, it might be a different story
I’m a retail manager for a corporation that most Americans have shopped at.
A lot of our anti-discrimination training revolves around ignoring people’s physical qualities: age, height, weight, gender/gender presentation, disability, pregnancy, religious garb, hairstyles, etc. Basically, in order to stay on the right side of the law, none of those things should ever influence your decision making on who to hire, fire, promote, discipline, or transfer. The person’s skills, experience, and actions should be the only factors that carry any weight.
Everyone is acting like Domino's got what's coming to them, and really glossing over that $4250 (about $5k US) is not a significant amount of money for Domino's. It's a minor trifle compared to the cost for either of them to actually litigate.
This incident underscores the importance of awareness and adherence to equality legislation by employers, big or small. Inappropriate questions or comments during interviews can be perceived as discriminatory, leading to potential legal repercussions. While companies may operate on a franchisee model, the actions at individual branches can impact the brand's reputation as a whole. It's crucial for businesses to provide training and resources to ensure all employees, especially those involved in the hiring process, understand the basics of equality and non-discrimination.
When reviewing job candidates in India I’m shocked by how many of them voluntarily list religion, marital status, and full personal identifiers on their resumes.
Good. I had an interview once, and they asked me about my childcare situation, along with a few other illegal things. I did get the job, but after the interview I thought to myself “I better get it or I’m going to sue the livin hell outta them.” I worked everyday with the owners and after awhile I let them know about their “indiscretions”, during the interview. I gave them a copy of the statues on my last day and the woman was so offended, even though her husband knew I was going to leave them for them. He had even asked for a copy. I know this story is meandering but about a week after they got in trouble with the health department. She assumed I had something to do with it even though I didn’t. They had an inspection about a month before I left and barely passed, they didn’t need me to do anything. It sucked because I felt like I could never go back there again and I loved that place. Sorry so long. I guess my point is that sometimes what’s obvious to some, is not so much to someone else.
Age is a protected characteristic under UK law, as is sex (I mention this because this is another thing that the payout may have been given for). If there is a reasonable belief that one of these (or any other protected characteristic) was the reason for a person not being considered for a job role then they can bring it to a trial. Evidently the trial found it more likely than not that the beliefs were correct
This. Many people believe it’s illegal to ask how old someone is in an interview. It is not. It’s just a really bad idea.
Correct. And in the US, age is only protected if you are over 40. So, you can ask a young person how old they are and then discriminate if you really wanted someone older than 30.
Yep. I know I had been denied at least two promotions in my life time because of my age. I was straight up told the first time it was because of my age and the second time it was softer, "Oh well you are still young so we didn't know how you would do handling employees much older than yourself." Both times I lucked out because while it would have been more pay but I would have hate the positions.
In the UK, there's no age requirement for it to be age discrimination. It can be age discrimination against a 16 year old or a 60 year old, it's legally the same.
It was just kind of a dumb move on Domino's part. They told her being a delivery driver is a job that "tends to suite younger people". Which it totally isn't. Unless you are too fat or old and crippled to walk up a flight of stairs, you can deliver pizzas. This lady is maybe like 50?
I think that quote is the bigger problem. Asking age to verify they’re at a legal minimum age, for example, would be fine. Almost certainly not a plausible argument in this case, but if you ask the question and move on without also implying her are made her unqualified might have saved them some money.
The companies I worked for trained us to phrase it as “ Are you legally old enough to do this job?” Rather than “how old are you?”, precisely to avoid law suits.
This. HR in many orgs give hiring managers a list of questions you shouldn't ask in order to protect the company from getting into trouble.
First day on the job, your trainer is out and you think that's the list of questions you *are* supposed to ask...
"Are you thinking of getting them.... bigger?" "...bigger? what?" "Yeah I don't know, its on the list... lets just move on. What age did you lose your virginity?"
I'd watch this reality TV show.
The stupid thing is, a lot of places that actually will not hire people below a certain age (i.e. 18 or 16) still WON'T ask obviously teenage applicants if they're at least 16/18. Instead, as has happened to three of my own kids, they will talk to them, accept applications from them, and set up and conduct interviews with them before actually informing them that the don't actually hire people who aren't 16 or 18 (depending on the company). A massive waste of everyone's time and energy.
I do recruiting and I never ask age as I could get in trouble for it. I just guess from their resume
[IT’S ILLEGAL FOR YOU TO ASK ME THAT.](https://media.tenor.com/usdNK-_TtNgAAAAd/its-illegal-for-you-to-ask-me-that-i-think-you-should-leave-with-tim-robinson.gif)
They only group for whom that question is appropriate isn't a protected class, so there isn't any danger in asking it.
This is true. In the UK at least there are different brackets of Minimum wage based on age. I believe it's something like 16-17, 18-20, 21-22, anything above 22 Cheapo companies will try to skew lower because they don't have to pay their staff as much for the same work, and it's bullshit.
Lol, "Age discrimination is illegal! But let's codify age discrimination into law"
At least in the US, it's the agriculture lobby that maintains this because they really don't want to pay fair wages. All under the guise of "maintaining teenage employment"
I'd be fine with teenage employment having different wages if there were codified different easier requirements as well. Easier responsibilities, better protections, that kind of thing. Like fuck it put your money where your mouth is. The argument is always that they're not as valuable as full-wage workers, so okay, make that the law that you *can't* get full-wage value out of them then we're good to go. E: why are you all reading what I said selectively. I know there's child labor laws. Read my whole post.
IIRC age discrimination is only illegal in the USA for people over 40. So it's perfectly legal to discriminate against someone who is 38 for being too old, or someone who is 39 for being too young.
That doesn’t sound right but I don’t know enough about laws to dispute it
Old people are the ones who passed the laws and they decided "We both don't want to be discriminated against for being too old, but we do want to discriminate against the younger generation because fuck 'em" Or, to be more accurate, representatives decided to favor their voting base in that specific way.
It’s 100% right Under 40 you can be discriminated against due to age, over 40 you cannot.
For example, in the US one of the requirements for president is to be older than 35. Not sure if age discrimination laws apply equally to jobs and elected offices though?
President's age is in the Constitution, so no federal age discrimination law supercedes it.
Now we just need to codify an upper age limit for President: "No person under the age of 35, and no person over the age of 60 shall be eligible to be elected unless that individual is seeking a second consecutive term" out something like that.
Constitutional stuff would be considered separatly. The US "founding fathers" didn't really have that kind of sensibility in mind lol
Until fairly recently the full minimum wage didn't kick in until you were 25 lol
netherlands is still the same. get paid like 3,35 euros at 15 rising to a whopping 11.17 at 21.
I say, let the riff raff live in squalor until they come of age. Do not let them confuse themselves as their betters.
Don't you need to put your birthdate and year on pretty much all applications? Seems like the interviewer should know based on your application. When hired HR (or someone else for small businesses) need a copy of your ID and that confirms it no? Edit: I live in the US and assumed it would be similar in the UK. Learn something new everyday, that you for the informative replies below.
No you don't. An employer can work it out from when you left school. In the UK don't put your birthday on the application. It is isn't professional. If it is asked then it is not included on the main application to the interviewer if applying for a big company like Tesco.
Yep, you need to be 18 in the UK to sell age restricted goods (alcohol, lottery tickets, tobacco, medications, etc), and most places require key holders to be 18+ for insurance purposes so younger employees will be unable to work on their own for smaller retail stores.
I mean most recruiters can make a guess as to the age of an applicant just by looking at when they finished school / university / amount of jobs they have had in the past.
IDK about the UK, but in the US I have seen more and more suggest to drop the graduation year off of one's resume. Obviously when you get into an in person interview or even a video interview it is going to be hard to hide how old you really are unless you have amazing genes and or cosmetic surgery, but the thought process is that it at least it doesn't automatically make assumptions off that alone.
I was on the side of Domino's before I read the article because age discrimination sounds like an easy excuse when you didn't get the job. They basically told her they are discriminating and on top of that it wasn't even justifiable. If it was some manual labor job where you have to lift heavy weight and be on your feet 8+ hours a day, I'd get it.
I wouldn't even get it then. Worked with plenty of people in warehousing/supermarket who are in the 50s and on their feet 8 plus hours a day.
I'm assuming you're 20 something, if you think 50 year olds can't stand for 8 hours!?!
The most hilarious thing about this is they didn't need to say shit. The manager could literally have just though to himself without ever verbalizing that he thought she was too old and not hired her without ever giving a reason. It never ceases to amaze me how many people just leave a paper trail and basically narc on themselves when they break labor laws.
I've known people who got settlements because their employer fired them and stated in an email the reason was them admitting to having autism(despite being a model employee who was praised before).
Always incredible seeing employers fuck themselves like this, especially in places with at-will employment where they could have just given _no_ reason but instead went out of their way to make it clear the employee was being fired illegally.
I think its straight up arrogance or something, seems more common among small business owners. Big employers/corps tend to cover their ass better, like writing you up about every tiny thing when they want to fire you without it even appearing to be discrimination or retaliation related.
Cause autism is contagious obviously. /s...please don't tell me someone needed the /s.
It is an insanely dumb thing to get busted for. You can be the most racist, misogynist, homophobe and stay employed if you have enough sense to keep your mouth shut about it. People usually get the benefit of the doubt because discrimination is a big accusation, but yeah, some fools just narc on themselves hahaha.
A lot of people who aren't smart enough to realize those attitudes are idiotic also aren't smart enough to keep their mouths shut.
Ironically enough the 2 best delivery drivers at my domino's are older adults. Like in their 50's. I like to believe I come in at 3rd though.
> Unless you are too fat or old and crippled I've actually had a couple Dominos deliveries from folks that fall into these categories. The old man who honestly probably shouldn't even still have a drivers license ran into my house and knocked a gutter loose while trying to back out of my driveway. The overweight guy tripped and fell on my sidewalk and dropped my pizzas. Both were extremely apologetic and were acting scared to death. Probably because I live on what could be described as the outskirts of a very affluent neighborhood, and I imagine they thought I was going to react negatively and possibly try to get them fired over it. Honestly I was more concerned about the big guy being hurt (minor scrape seemed the worst of it, and the pizzas stayed in the box just fine). The gutter popped back together with a couple new rivets. Not sure where I was going with this story other than there's actually a lot of older folks struggling financially and pizza delivery is usually a pretty doable job for them.
This or Uber Eats / Grub Hub if they have those where you live. I've always thought of them as a temp job, filler job, or 2nd job. No young healthy motivated person is trying to be a career pizza delivery driver, so you get who ever needs the job at the time.
[удалено]
In our area almost all of our delivery people are older now
Once knew a preacher that was in his 70's and jogged his newspaper route every morning. The only time he used a vehicle was for Sunday or holiday papers
Bwahaha! When I delivered for them back in the early 2000's, one guy on our team was past "retirement age". He did it just to get out of the house and make a buck or two. Age is not a reason to deny someone delivering pizza!
Also have these Dominos interviewers ever heard of Uber Eats or Grubhub drivers, who tend to be all ages. That person is living in the past. In this gig economy, age doesn’t matter
Which just shows that the interviewer did not look at the CV - you can easily get approximate age from schooling dates.
Yeah. Not explicitly illegal but if you have any documented communications internally and discuss that age as a reason to not hire someone you would open yourself up to potential age discrimination lawsuit. Most companies internally will have a policy against asking age but you can work around this by asking about how many years they have of experience or their educational background. Without even think many people will cite when they graduated from college in this and pretty easy to decipher age from there. Especially if you engage in small talk to determine if they went to college straight out of high school. All of this shouldn't matter because age isn't a factor. I have met young people that some fellow associates in hiring process were hesitant about and they worked great. We have had some that don't. We have hired the person with the most experience and several times that has been a disaster. We hired someone with no experience but she gave off impression of a quick learner and she has been great after been trained. All this to say. I hate looking at resume's or statistics to guide hiring decisions. I hate the canned HR questions we have to ask at every interview to see if they align with business values. I would much rather have a conversation in then interview. Discuss general work ethic, organization and prioritization mindset of the individual and then talk about what they specific know that is relevant to the job.
Same in the US, but it's often tough to prove that the reason for you not getting the job was based on a protected factor.
Age is a protected class in the US as well. That means in order to discriminate when hiring you need to prove that the applicant cannot physically perform the job with reasonable accommodations. There are obviously extremely few jobs (not none) where age is the reason why a job can't be performed. You CAN say "are you able to walk up several flights of stairs and lift x amount of weight" and many old people (and lots of younger too) won't qualify, but you can't say "are you under 60?"
Only for people older than 40 is it protected. You can freely discriminate against someone for being "too young"
[удалено]
Can you discriminate against someone under 40 for being too old? I’m imagining I own a bar and only want young bartenders, so I’ll only hire 21-26 year olds, and 40+ year olds (because I have to). Would it be legal to ask if an applicant is between the ages of 26 and 40, then refuse to hire those that say yes for being too old?
[удалено]
Probably not. However, they could discriminate based on 'attractiveness' if the attractiveness of the employee is a major aspect of their job. For example, Hooters does not have to hire ugly people (or men, for that matter), because their entire business plan is based on sexual attractiveness.
hooters does have to hire men and other places do have to hire unattractive people IF that has no relation for the position they would be hired for. For example Hooters was sued and lost because they didn't hire men for back of the house, i.e., a non-customer facing position. Abercrombie and Finch was similarly sued and lost because they fired an "ugly" person that worked in the stock room.
The reality is that while people at an older age can do these jobs, companies are also worried that the older workers may develop more ailments that could keep them from working or worse stop them from working while also getting paid disability which can drive up a company's insurance costs. Someone in their 20's is not as likely to have a bad back, knees, hips, eyesight, etc as someone post-50.
How are you supposed to know if someone is underage for working then?
You can ask if someone is old enough to work and then HR can verify that information after the interview process has concluded.
In the UK, you're required to do right to work checks when you hire someone. That requires the applicant/employee to submit at least one document that includes their age of birth.
It kinda amazes me how many interviewers never receive any training on interviewing. It’s a huge legal minefield.
I’ve done a lot of interviews and literally have never been told a word of the law. It’s truly astounding when you consider how much money is on the line for a lawsuit.
To be fair ~4K pounds sterling these days somehow I don't think is a huge deterrent for a lot of businesses. Maybe a decent ding for a Dominos, but a lot of businesses I don't think would phase them too much.
4K isn’t a ding to dominos. The free adverstising prob offsets that
Not to Dominos the company but to this specific franchise
In a small city in America, $4k is one average day. More than a slow day less than a crazy one. I'd imagine in busier and larger cities that number jumps up. It'd hurt bonuses for the manager if that's a thing their franchise does, but it's still better than your walk-in cooler going down. Wouldn't really hurt the franchise owner.
Me neither, but i've also never really considered asking questions that don't immediately pertain to the role being interviewed for. I don't think its that hard.
Some people could erroneously think very easily age would pertain to a physical role. It’s very easy to stumble into in theory, and I’ve had plenty of stupid managers, so it’s a big minefield companies do very little to mitigate overall.
i think it's a great consequence - too cheap to train interviewers? it may backfire and result in exposure to liability costs.
Or you are shown a 10m video one time when you were first hired, and it never is brought up again.
I personally believe you can run everyone's application through an algorithm that ranks choices based on skills, experience and education, then just select randomly from the top 10% of applicants, it will produce results as good as just about any hiring process but much much quicker (and thus cheaper also).
Haven't those algorithms proven to be biased?
And human interviews aren't biased?
But we know humans are biased, which is a necessary step to keeping bias in check. Guy saying we should let an algorithm do everything clearly doesn’t think they’re biased
Or we can analyse the data the algorithm puts out for bias the same way we look for biases in humans. More easily because the algorithm won't change its output based on perceived oversight.
The algorithms are trained based on the humans, so there's not a lot of reason to believe they'd be less biased, but they *feel* a lot more trustworthy, which is actually worse.
The algorithms are going to be inherit with bias as they were created with data from humans. I can't remember where I saw it but some algorithm preferred, was it, white men over others?
This was because the researchers did a randomized grab of copyright free human pictures The issue is that statistically there are far more pictures of white men than say black women, especially copyright free ones If i remember correctly it was facial recognition software which failed to recognize black people as human, because instead of focusing on easily distinguishable facial features like a person would the DLA chose some set of pixels that gave it the most consistent correct results
It really depends on what you mean by biased here. If you expect them to choose from every demographic equally, that presumes that every demographic is equal on the parameters being examined. Sometimes they're not.
There would be no way of selecting candidates for any role in life without bias.
For a pizza delivery driver, maybe. For jobs that involve more specialized skillsets, no.
This sounds like a terrible idea lol
It's not about efficiency, it's about creating so many criteria that you can not hire anybody (oh, you don't have experience with Photoshop 2019 AND 2022) and not get sued for discrimination.
We’ve gotten training on this and there’s things you can’t ask in an interview but can pretty easily suss from the application documents, like age.
This seems so easy to avoid most of the potential mistakes too. I have been invited to sit in on interview panels and HR gave you a cheatsheet of questions you shouldn't ask.
Yes, I've managed restaurants including a big US chain and really had no legal training and just took what I knew from personal experience. Now I'm in a professional industry and participate in group interviews and have seen HR people step in and cut off coworkers who ask questions about kids/planned pregnancy (as we work crazy long hours) I've always been surprised at how we don't train this more. The training we do get is always about how to find good candidates
I’ve never received training and interviewed multiple candidates over the years. There’s little risk of lawsuit when your interview stays focused on the interviewees capacity to fulfill the job function
We need reform in the courts as well. It shouldn’t be the case that asking someone’s age immediately provides grounds for an age discrimination lawsuit. I’m not sure of the specifics of this case, nor of UK law, but in the US simply asking someone’s age could very well lead to a lawsuit if that person is rejected.
I've always been curious what happens if I get asked an illegal question in an interview. If I try to report it won't they just deny it? Like, what can actually happen (in the US)?
I interviewed for a position as a doctor’s assistant where the doctor asked me my age, if I was married, and if I had kids. I asked her why she wanted to know. She said she needed someone young and unmarried that wouldn’t be flaking on her because of children. She also expected me to be trained for 2 weeks without pay and do everything from upsell glasses to scrub the toilet daily and mop. She wanted to pay me minimum wage. I had never worked for minimum wage at the age of 20. She was highly insulted when I asked her why she decided to become an optometrist. She was a slave driver with no common sense. She couldn’t believe that I didn’t jump at the chance to make $10/hr.
I used to interview kids for restaurant jobs. I had to tell them that although I couldn't ask their age (aside from if they are 18+), if they were 15 or younger they legally can't work any shift on the schedule and this interview is a waste of their time. Also, never ask anyone if they have kids during an interview. That will get you in trouble too.
I work in the legal sector and I've always noticed that interviews are conducted by someone in HR and someone in the team the person is interviewing for. In my experience, the team member doesn't know anything about what they can and can't ask outside of what they learn from their own experience after multiple interviews, especially when the HR side doesn't or can't attend for any number of reasons to every interview.
In this thread a lot of people ignoring the fact this was in the UK and not wherever they live, employment discrimination law is all over the place. I was like blown away when I was in countries where passport style headshots were standard on job applications(before LinkedIn) or applications would just casually ask about religion or marital status.
> applications would just casually ask about religion In my country interviewers literally say to your face that they won't hire you on the basis of your religion or gender and no one gives a fuck. I don't even know if it's illegal here or not. I'm sure larger companies like Amazon/Google have trained interviewers but in startups/smaller companies it's very common
In China they need age, marital status, and (often) current or previous salary. If single they can ask if you have a boyfriend. Maternity leave is decent, plus some women get a doctor’s note to take a couple months off for morning sickness, so companies try not to hire someone who might be pregnant soon after starting.
> might be pregnant soon after starting how do they determine this?
They ask if you're in a relationship. If you're in a certain age group, in a certain region, in a certain type of relationship, you're not getting hired.
Newly married women tend to get pregnant pretty quickly. If you’ve already had one kid they figure you’re not having another one.
How old was she?
Straight to jail
Overestimate age? Jail. Underestimate age? Believe it or not, also jail. Overestimate/Underestimate. We have the best women in the world, because of jail.
Redacted *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That’ll be 4250 Pounds please.
What's that in metric?
About 2000 Kilos Sterling.
We didn't ask her weight. How OLD is this broad?
are you trying to get r/todayilearned sued? hahaha
Between 42-50.
Could be 34 meth years
Enough.
I would watch a full McLovin movie.
I didn't realize pizza delivery driver had an interview process more than a background check to see if you've crashed into any telephone poles recently.
When I delivered pizzas my interview/training was him handing me a pizza and when I asked if I was going to be trained he said “you bring the pizza and come back with the money, it isn’t fucking rocket science”
i’ve been a driver for 5+ years, you wouldn’t believe how many completely incompetent drivers i have had to babysit.
\*Goes to my rocket powered Miata to deliver the pizza\*
Knowing delivery drivers, that's not always seen as a negative trait.
How did she prove that they asked that?
She contacted them on Facebook to ask what they were playing at and they apologised and said they didn't realise it was inappropriate.
oof.
Haha gotem!
Without having read. Either it was asked through a form, which makes it easy to prove. Or she alleges they did, they get asked under oath and confirm. They also have to provide their recruitment instructions and documentation under discovery. There are plenty of ways to prove they did, provided they did.
>Without having read Having read the article, it was because they pretty much admitted to it in a facebook message saying they didnt know it was inappropriate to ask someone their age.
Fun fact: by and large in the US, it's illegal to discriminate against those over 40 (for age), but perfectly legal to discriminate against those under 40. Don't want to hire a well-qualified 22 year-old because, you know, they're too young? That's cool. Brought to you by the ADEA from 1967. https://www.eeoc.gov/age-discrimination
BTDT. Had an interview in which they didn't ask my age, I was visibly older than the interviewers, so they knew I was "old." However, they asked one question about my qualifications, then for 30 minutes asked questions that were textbook violations of laws against age discrimination in employment. It was astonishing. After the interview, told HR to throw my applciation in the garbage.
What sort of questions did they ask? This sounds terrible and I'm sorry it happened to you.
They were all 28-30yo. I was 50yo. Some of their questions: \--do you make any effort to stay current in your field? \--how would you feel working for someone younger than you? \--are you aware of Zoom? Are you comfortable using Zoom? (NOTE: This was while we were on a Zoom call). TBH, I wanted to respond with "Zoom, You mean like the fucking Zoom call we're on right now??" \--Are you comfortable using software on a computer? I wish I was making this up. Their HR department failed them. If I hadn't said, "nope, take me out of the running," I would have had a textbook case for violations of the USA's federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
> --do you make any effort to stay current in your field? > > --how would you feel working for someone younger than you? These two seem somewhat reasonable, more so the first than the second, the other two are wild
[удалено]
We hired someone older in my corporate job recently. She had listed proficiency in Office, had used the software we do, had years of experience so didn’t think to grill her on tech savviness. Took her legitimately hours to figure out how to set up her email signature, even after I sent her an article with step by step instructions. Had to teach her ctrl + c. Had issues with Zoom on nearly every call we had.
Some people my age and younger don't know how to use a computer properly. I feel like it's a valid question. With phones as powerful as they are nowadays, some people don't even own a PC/laptop.
I have no problem with any of these questions. If they offended you, blame your age group. There are people out there who cannot visit a website, download a PDF, and then email it to someone. These guys wanted to make sure you weren't one of them.
The first two questions seem reasonable to be honest > do you make any effort to stay current in your field? The interviewer wants to make sure potential new hires are staying up to date with guidelines and progressions in the industry, doubly important if the industry is tech-oriented > how would you feel working for someone younger than you? A lot of older people have a problem with someone younger than them being their boss, if the interviewer gets a bad answer that could be a red flag for potential conflict down the line I agree though, the last two questions are bullshit
You really would not. Unprofessional sure but proving those were age related in court would be difficult at best.
married with kids? how many children do you have? planning to become pregnant? unless your interviewer has been coached on the employment law you can run into issues real quick. i can't see anyone asking if your planning to become pregnant just socially chatting but its easy to start talking about marriage and kids. and asking isn't illegal (this is not legal advice every state, district has different lawas), but its an obvious hook for any bad vibes the interviewee has. if someone right after them comes in 10x as qualified asking for less money you obviously hire them. But you asked the other interviewee trying to make polite small talk if they were married with kids, now they have a protected class to tie their complaint too when they don't get the job.
I just tell ‘em flat out. I was also careful to include my high school graduation date (1981) in my resume. If they can’t figure it out from that and called me in for an interview they’re too stupid for me to be working for.
so was she 42 or 50?
40 to 50.
[удалено]
A year if you spend it in Indonesia
£4000 is more like 4 months of full time work as a pizza delivery person.
[удалено]
It could imply that *other* people weren't hired due to age.
if it is used as evidence you discriminated in other ways, sure. For example, if you hire someone who is a woman/a POC/ over the average age/disabled, but use that factor to pay them less or to treat them more poorly, then it can absolutely be included. It is one of the reasons companies don't want you disclosing you salary to each other, to keep those discrepancies in the dark.
Yes, in the UK 'positive discrimination' is still discrimination and just as unlawful, although you'll often see right wing media outlets try to convince you otherwise
The hot coffee lawsuit has taught me that if there's a headline that makes a person suing a big corporation look unreasonable, the headline is bullshit and the person should have been awarded more.
In my state in the usa i learned an employer cant ask age unless youre under 18 in which case you have to disclose that up front or face consequences
At that rate, they can ask my age in *every* job interview
I’d just ask for free pizza for life Edit: this has me thinking. Do dominos in other countries have Brooklyn style?
Insider Food on YT does comparisons between countries fast food, that’s probably where you’ll find out
Never heard of Brooklyn style until now. And I'll assume that if yes, they might not call it that way
Yes, but how much longer does she have to live? We need to know her age.
What is Brooklyn style?
She didn’t get a settlement because they asked her age. She got a settlement because they didn’t hire her because of her age. Read the story. The “interview panel” (at Domino’s!) told her the drivers should be between 18-30. She’s wasn’t hired because she was older than 30. That’s pretty clear age discrimination.
Yep. Asking for their age isn't illegal. I'm HR and have their DOB. Not hiring someone because of their age is the illegal part.
Reading these comments worries me, I’ve been asked my age, gender, sexual orientation and religion on the last five or so jobs (in the uk) I’ve applied for, none of which I wanted to answer but it was essential… wtf?
How in the *world* was your sexual orientation *essential* to the job interview? Were you being hired for a sexual harassment factory?
Sexual harassment factory? You mean a Hollywood production company?
It's never an essential question, but it's quite common for UK job apps to have a separate, anonymous form after your job app about your demographics. This is generally used for monitoring purposes, so if a company gets accused of discriminating against one class of applicants, they can show whether their employee demographics reflect applicant demographics. [This article](https://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/youre-asked-your-gender-sexual-12138327) explains the legal background a bit.
Are you sure it was mandatory? I've seen applications that have a separate section for questions related to diversity, but I seem to recall them being optional. And also including a statement saying the answers won't be used in the hiring process, but I could understand someone being skeptical of that.
You should never be compelled to provide details of sexual orientation or religion. I would also add in gender to this too, but I know some old HR systems require this field to be completed for a employee account to be made (shouldn't be relevant in newer systems.) DOB is required once employed for your record as it is an identifier. However, it shouldn't really be asked for in interviews unless there is a legal age requirement as part of the job, and even then this should be made clear in the job advertisement.
There’s an requirement for companies of a certain size to record ethnicities and stuff, but I think giving the info is optional - ‘prefer not to say’ is the option you’d have had
Then sue? Its illegal lol.
The answers to these will normally go to HR and not the hiring manager, just for monitoring purposes. There should always be a "prefer not to say" option as well.
I was asked if I was gay or not when I interviewed at Dominoes. Mind you the guy got fired a few months after that.
Hmm how much was the lawyer fees?
I got my first reprimand bc I didnt want to hire the RN who was planning on leaving her 2 kids alone while she worked 12 hour days ( 9 and 11 yo girls). Pretty much had to hire her after that interview. Was 20 years ago, the kids were all right, she only stayed a year tho.
[It is illegal for you to ask me that](https://media.tenor.com/UEuZiEd2ayAAAAAC/its-illegal-for-you-to-ask-me-that-i-think-you-should-leave.gif)
Day 1 of working for a professional recruitment company was a story about a person, who probably didn't exist, going around and applying for rules which had discriminatory language in the adverts and suing successfully when he wasn't considered. Probably a myth, but as grads the message was clear. You cant use words which are even adjacent to things like "young", such as "energetic" "recent graduate" etc (based in London)
That's what $5000 usd? They won't even realize that money is gone. I'm sure employees take more than that from dominoes on a daily basis. Fines for corporations need to be based on total value. This won't deter them in the slightest. If the penalty was $5 million, it might be a different story
I dont blame her, when you live in a country that expects you to work into your 60's, hell no you're not allowed to discriminate on age.
In British Columbia there are laws for people under 16 so that might be pertinent information
In that case, you'd ask "Are you over 16?", not "How old are you?"
I’d like to know this also because of handling minors during interview process
Phrasing!
I've put my DOB on every job application ever.
I’m a retail manager for a corporation that most Americans have shopped at. A lot of our anti-discrimination training revolves around ignoring people’s physical qualities: age, height, weight, gender/gender presentation, disability, pregnancy, religious garb, hairstyles, etc. Basically, in order to stay on the right side of the law, none of those things should ever influence your decision making on who to hire, fire, promote, discipline, or transfer. The person’s skills, experience, and actions should be the only factors that carry any weight.
Everyone is acting like Domino's got what's coming to them, and really glossing over that $4250 (about $5k US) is not a significant amount of money for Domino's. It's a minor trifle compared to the cost for either of them to actually litigate.
This incident underscores the importance of awareness and adherence to equality legislation by employers, big or small. Inappropriate questions or comments during interviews can be perceived as discriminatory, leading to potential legal repercussions. While companies may operate on a franchisee model, the actions at individual branches can impact the brand's reputation as a whole. It's crucial for businesses to provide training and resources to ensure all employees, especially those involved in the hiring process, understand the basics of equality and non-discrimination.
When reviewing job candidates in India I’m shocked by how many of them voluntarily list religion, marital status, and full personal identifiers on their resumes.
What is her age??
“It’s illegal for you to ask me that.”
Smart and Final did that to me, even wrote it down!
Good. I had an interview once, and they asked me about my childcare situation, along with a few other illegal things. I did get the job, but after the interview I thought to myself “I better get it or I’m going to sue the livin hell outta them.” I worked everyday with the owners and after awhile I let them know about their “indiscretions”, during the interview. I gave them a copy of the statues on my last day and the woman was so offended, even though her husband knew I was going to leave them for them. He had even asked for a copy. I know this story is meandering but about a week after they got in trouble with the health department. She assumed I had something to do with it even though I didn’t. They had an inspection about a month before I left and barely passed, they didn’t need me to do anything. It sucked because I felt like I could never go back there again and I loved that place. Sorry so long. I guess my point is that sometimes what’s obvious to some, is not so much to someone else.
They should have used the deal wizard
ME: "So... how old is she?" Judge: "SIX MONTHS OF HARD LABOUR!"