Why Not Ask?
LivindonSouth
1,358 Posts
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 06-16-05 AT 03:17PM (CST)[/font][br][br]In another thread on questions to not ask in interviews, Christy refers us to a monthly newsletter. One of the questions the newsletter cautions against asking is 'Did you receive a military discharge other than honorable?' Will somebody please tell me what discriminatory flag that might raise? We have every bit as much right to ask that as we do about convictions for civilian crimes. Dishonorable and other than honorable do not, as far as I know, raise a shield of protection for any protected group. As relates to future employment, there is no special protection afforded those who are drummed out of the military or who are found guilty of infractions while in the military. I do not find this prohibition in USERRA either. What have I missed?
I also require a copy of a DD-214 with an application, just as I would a resume or other piece of information upon which to consider backround.
I also require a copy of a DD-214 with an application, just as I would a resume or other piece of information upon which to consider backround.
Comments
A service member may have received a general-under-honorable for being a homosexual, being a single parent and failing to execute a proper care plan, being overweight, being a conscientous objector due to a strongly held religious belief, the list goes on and on.
Gene
As Don said, I don't think murderers are a protected class.
The reason I used those examples are because I personally processed those while on active duty. Yes, they were unique in their own special way, but that's the way it went down.
Gene
Gene
Perhaps the article should have said not to ask WHY a person was discharged; in case they answer that they didn't pass a random drug test and they are a recovering addict from their horible experience in combat.
Yes it is very hot here. Training has been shut down two days now between 1130 until about 1830. We're not allowed to do anything-resume training in the evening and start training earlier in the morning.
Peyton Irby
Editor, Mississippi Employment Law Letter
Watkins Ludlam Winter & Stennis, P.A.
(601) 949-4810
[email]pirby@watkinsludlam.com[/email]
Thanks!
Thanks for asking.
PORK
Pork, I think I saw yours preserved at the national archives. It was signed by Horatio Gates, Adjutant General, Continental Army. Just kidding.
Gene
Thanks for the education. With experiencing greater and greater numbers of employees going to Iraq, it is good to understand as much as possible.
In summary, none of those points to any sort of protected class (except perhaps in a few states like California and Vermont). Not that I would ask, but being a homosexual does not grant one protected class status. Nor does not taking care of your child properly. Nor does being overweight, although I suspect that would be a medical discharge. And certainly being a conscientious objector grants one no protections under any law in civilian society. Maybe this list that 'goes on and on' will surface so that we might see some rationale for the article telling us to not ask the question about discharge. Or maybe Christy will ask the author to reply.
(At least I've learned something on this thread. I had no idea PoRk served in that era.)
I didn't offer these suggestions as the absolute, factual basis for the article. I simply stated why they might be possibilities.
I don't see anyone else offering any ideas.
Gene
PORK
Yes, I am feeling just fine and enjoying life as a professional HR better with every turn of the day.
Vet may your day be Blessed, even today, AND MAYBE THE WHOLE WEEK-END.
PORK
Yes they do still give "medical discharges" sort of. I'll try to explain. If you are overweight you still get an honorable discharge. Most of the soldiers that are overweight are only overweight by military standards and not protected under grossly overweight ADA standards. Now, you could conceivably have a soldier with a medical condition that lead to the overweight and is protected under ADA (but obviously still discharged from the military). There is a re-enlistment code at the bottom of the DD214 (discharge papers)that would prevent them from coming back in the Army. There is also an Authority code listed which when looked up would tell you the reason for the discharge i.e. "medical" but those codes are only known to the Army and even then not widely known. It would take me a while to look up a discharge and authority code - it's not easy. So... It's doubtful that a prospective ER is risking uncovering protected information. Does that help?
I still have a lot to say but I want to go to dinner. I'll be back. My shift doesn't end until 1900 hours!
They, too, had room service. x;-)
Besides, everyone seems to forget; if it is "your" tax dollars then it is MY tax dollars also! The soldiers pay taxes too!
As far as MWR funds are concerned you're correct. They do fund the majority of such services and I stand partially corrected.
"This guidance comes from the Fair Inquiry Guidelines issued by the EEOC.
The EEOC does not provide a basis for its position but I assume it is
concerned about information disclosing a disability or an arrest record."
I did a little more research this morning to find the Fair Inquiry Guidelines. This is what the guidelines say:
[b]Military [/b]
Unlawful Inquiries: Type or condition of military discharge. Request for discharge papers.
Lawful Inquiries: Inquiries concerning education, training, or work experience in the armed forces of the United States. (Note: in many areas, veterans are a protected class.)
The guidelines are listed several places on the Internet. Here's a link:
[url]www.stat.washington.edu/www/jobs/questions/[/url]
P.S. I noticed the questions about address. I never accept a post office box as a valid address. The employee does not report to work from a mailbox. Maybe tell us more about that one.