Walmart to hire vets

[Mgderf]

Fox news is reporting that Wal-Mart has announced they are going to hire any vet that wants a job, starting on Memorial Day.

Kudo's to Wal-Mart

 

[Kutnupe14]

I strongly disagree with their choice, but it is, "their choice."

 

[Bunnykid68]

I strongly disagree with their choice, but it is, "their choice."

I gotta ask, why?

 

[Kutnupe14]

I gotta ask, why?

Because it appears to imply that other people, looking for employment, are going to be turned away. Service entitles one to many things, but preference over another, especially when both are of equal need, shouldn't be one of them. Non-Mil have to eat just as much as ex-Mil.

 

[Mgderf]

Because it appears to imply that other people, looking for employment, are going to be turned away. Service entitles one to many things, but preference over another, especially when both are of equal need, shouldn't be one of them. Non-Mil have to eat just as much as ex-Mil.

O.K. I understand your sentiment, but let me ask you this,

When was the last time you felt an obligation to tell a "Non-Mil" as you put it, "Thank you for all you've done to protect my freedoms."?

For that matter, when was the last time you told a vet, "Thank you for your service"?

Congress adopted the G.I. Bill because they felt that military did indeed deserve preferential treatment. Was that wrong too?

 

[Bunnykid68]

Because it appears to imply that other people, looking for employment, are going to be turned away. Service entitles one to many things, but preference over another, especially when both are of equal need, shouldn't be one of them. Non-Mil have to eat just as much as ex-Mil.

Meh, the government has been doing that for years, it's only fair blah blah blah sorry I just couldnt say anymore bull****

 

[Bunnykid68]

O.K. I understand your sentiment, but let me ask you this,

When was the last time you felt an obligation to tell a "Non-Mil" as you put it, "Thank you for all you've done to protect my freedoms."?

For that matter, when was the last time you told a vet, "Thank you for your service"?

Congress adopted the G.I. Bill because they felt that military did indeed deserve preferential treatment. Was that wrong too?

Yes it was wrong. One should be hired or not hired based solely on their qualifications.

I have never liked being discriminated against because I am white and male.

 

[Mgderf]

Yes it was wrong. One should be hired or not hired based soley on their qualifications.

I have never liked being discriminated against because I am white and male.

I said nothing about discrimination, YOU did!
'
The whole idea behind the G.I. bill was to give preferential consideration to vets while all other criteria remained the same. In other words, of all equally qualified applicants, vets should be given more weight in their considerations.

Notice I said, "equally qualified", so please explain to me how you see this as discrimination.

 

[Mgderf]

Yes it was wrong. One should not be hired or not hired based solely on their qualifications.

You've got to be kidding, right?

What would be your criteria for hiring then, a smell test? Who's tallest, who has the biggest chest, hat size...?

If you would not hire based on qualifications, I would suggest you refrain from starting a business.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I said nothing about discrimination, YOU did!
'
The whole idea behind the G.I. bill was to give preferential consideration to vets while all other criteria remained the same. In other words, of all equally qualified applicants, vets should be given more weight in their considerations.

Notice I said, "equally qualified", so please explain to me how you see this as discrimination.

That is discrimination any way you want to phrase it. You give someone an advantage that is no more qualified is discrimination.

All things being equal, if I hire you and you are white and there is an equally qualified black person that does not get hired because they are not white is discrimination. 2 white people and one gets hired because they were in the military is the same thing.

 

[Bunnykid68]

You've got to be kidding, right?

What would be your criteria for hiring then, a smell test? Who's tallest, who has the biggest chest, hat size...?

If you would not hire based on qualifications, I would suggest you refrain from starting a business.

Perhaps I edited my typo before you posted this but qualifications should be the only determining factor in hiring someone, not their service to something or their race or gender etc,.....

 

[Mgderf]

That is discrimination any way you want to phrase it. You give someone an advantage that is no more qualified is discrimination.

All things being equal, if I hire you and you are white and there is an equally qualified black person that does not get hired because they are not white is discrimination. 2 white white people and one gets hired because they were in the military is the same thing.

Sorry, but I just can't follow your logic.

"All things being equal, if I hire you and you are white there is an equally qualified black person that does not get hired because they are not white is discrimination."
So now I'm a racist too, if I hire an "EQUALLY QUALIFIED" person?
How did you get to "...not hired because they are not white? That statement is incredulous. It has no basis in reason.
I made no statement or inferences that could POSSIBLY be construed as racist, by any reasonable, thoughtful person.

If that is your train of thought, then sir, I call YOU a racist, and discriminatory.

 

[Bunnykid68]

To the veterans, thank you for your service, but you do not deserve a leg up on anyone else simply because you served. Sorry, that includes my dad too, who got his ass blasted up in Vietnam.

 

[LANShark42]

Based on observing the type people hired by the Walmarts I've been in, They currently have ZERO requirements. Just sayin'...

 

[Bunnykid68]

Sorry, but I just can't follow your logic.

"All things being equal, if I hire you and you are white there is an equally qualified black person that does not get hired because they are not white is discrimination."
So now I'm a racist too, if I hire an "EQUALLY QUALIFIED" person?
How did you get to "...not hired because they are not white? That statement is incredulous. It has no basis in reason.
I made no statement or inferences that could POSSIBLY be construed as racist, by any reasonable, thoughtful person.

If that is your train of thought, then sir, I call YOU a racist, and discriminatory.

I never called you a racist sir. If 2 people are equally qualified it is discriminatory to hire the one who served in the military is my entire point. Nothing more. Sorry if you are not seeing my point.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Based on observing the type people hired by the Walmarts I've been in, They currently have ZERO requirements. Just sayin'...

Good point

 

[Mgderf]

I never called you a racist sir. If 2 people are equally qualified it is discriminatory to hire the one who served in the military is my entire point. Nothing more. Sorry if you are not seeing my point.

This is NOT what you said.
You said "...not hired because they were not white.

That, sir, is a racist statement, and inferred that that was the reason that I would hire a white person over a person of color.

Intended or not, I take offense to that implication.

 

[Bunnykid68]

This is NOT what you said.
You said "...not hired because they were not white.

That, sir, is a racist statement, and inferred that that was the reason that I would hire a white person over a person of color.

Intended or not, I take offense to that implication.

Yeah, try reading what I typed after I corrected my typo. Take all the offense you want, I told you I had a typo in my statement, I corrected said statement. Where is the problem?

FWIW I discriminate all the time

 

[Bunnykid68]

This is NOT what you said.
You said "...not hired because they were not white.

That, sir, is a racist statement, and inferred that that was the reason that I would hire a white person over a person of color.

Intended or not, I take offense to that implication.

Quote my whole statement and read it again

 

[Mgderf]

That is discrimination any way you want to phrase it. You give someone an advantage that is no more qualified is discrimination.

All things being equal, if I hire you and you are white and there is an equally qualified black person that does not get hired because they are not white is discrimination. 2 white people and one gets hired because they were in the military is the same thing.

Your point doesn't hold water. There is NO discrimination in hiring one person over another, having found all things equal. By this logic, to be fair, one should just cast these two "equally qualified individuals" out of contention for the position. So as not to discriminate, one should, by this logic, find someone less qualified, so as NOT to discriminate?

I appreciate your fathers service to this country. Maybe you should re-consider his contribution to your liberties, and how they've improved your life. Careful reflection on these facts may change your mind.