Mixing
What does the equal opportunity clause entail, with respect to citizenship? [closed]
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
-1
down vote
favorite
US employers often state something like:
Our policy is to ensure equal opportunity in all aspects of employment regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, citizenship, age, marital status, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or any other basis protected by law.
But in fact, employers can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship. This is because of potentially expensive and troublesome visa issues. How is that consistent with the above clause?
Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?
How is such discrimination different from, for example, discriminating against women because they might potentially get pregnant and take time off? Or from discriminating against Muslims because they might fast one month a year and may thus be less productive during that month?
discrimination
asked Jan 24 '16 at 8:41
Kenny LJ
3731412
closed as off-topic by Dawny33, HorusKol, Lilienthal♦, gnat, Joel Etherton Jan 25 '16 at 13:17
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave these specific reasons:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Dawny33, HorusKol, Joel Etherton
- "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – Lilienthal, gnat
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
-1
down vote
favorite
US employers often state something like:
Our policy is to ensure equal opportunity in all aspects of employment regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, citizenship, age, marital status, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or any other basis protected by law.
But in fact, employers can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship. This is because of potentially expensive and troublesome visa issues. How is that consistent with the above clause?
Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?
How is such discrimination different from, for example, discriminating against women because they might potentially get pregnant and take time off? Or from discriminating against Muslims because they might fast one month a year and may thus be less productive during that month?
discrimination
asked Jan 24 '16 at 8:41
Kenny LJ
3731412
closed as off-topic by Dawny33, HorusKol, Lilienthal♦, gnat, Joel Etherton Jan 25 '16 at 13:17
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave these specific reasons:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Dawny33, HorusKol, Joel Etherton
- "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – Lilienthal, gnat
1
Where is your evidence for "can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship"? Is this just anecdotal
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 8:45
2
This isn't strong enough for an answer, but I'm not sure that hiring someone that doesn't have a visa is the same as discrimination based on citizenship. There's a difference between saying that you won't hire someone because they are a citizen of a particular country and saying that you won't hire someone because they don't have the appropriate visas to work in the US (and you won't pay for the visas). I think it's up to the company if they want to sponsor a visa. I believe it's OK to not hire someone who isn't qualified to work in the US.
– Thomas Owens
Jan 24 '16 at 12:25
1
"Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?" Notice that phrase is "our policy". It doesn't say what happens when the law conflicts with "our policy", but I think we can guess. For example, it may well be my company's policy to be 100% OK with giving qualified nationals from country XYZ a job. But if it turns out that the local laws say that we can't do that...
– Brandin
Jan 24 '16 at 15:04
This is a site for practical, workplace-related questions. Not a debate platform. And as others have mentioned, discriminating on employment eligibility is legal, rational and different from discriminating on citizenship.
– Lilienthal♦
Jan 25 '16 at 9:57
There are non-citizens who can legally work and there are those who can't. I would say a company that doesn't base hiring on citizenship will draw the line at hiring people illegally. You can't discriminate on age, but we still have child-labor laws in the US.
– user8365
Jan 25 '16 at 14:54
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
-1
down vote
favorite
up vote
-1
down vote
favorite
US employers often state something like:
Our policy is to ensure equal opportunity in all aspects of employment regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, citizenship, age, marital status, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or any other basis protected by law.
But in fact, employers can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship. This is because of potentially expensive and troublesome visa issues. How is that consistent with the above clause?
Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?
How is such discrimination different from, for example, discriminating against women because they might potentially get pregnant and take time off? Or from discriminating against Muslims because they might fast one month a year and may thus be less productive during that month?
discrimination
asked Jan 24 '16 at 8:41
Kenny LJ
3731412
US employers often state something like:
Our policy is to ensure equal opportunity in all aspects of employment regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, citizenship, age, marital status, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or any other basis protected by law.
But in fact, employers can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship. This is because of potentially expensive and troublesome visa issues. How is that consistent with the above clause?
Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?
How is such discrimination different from, for example, discriminating against women because they might potentially get pregnant and take time off? Or from discriminating against Muslims because they might fast one month a year and may thus be less productive during that month?
discrimination
asked Jan 24 '16 at 8:41
Kenny LJ
3731412
asked Jan 24 '16 at 8:41
Kenny LJ
3731412
asked Jan 24 '16 at 8:41
Kenny LJ
3731412
asked Jan 24 '16 at 8:41
Kenny LJ
3731412
3731412
closed as off-topic by Dawny33, HorusKol, Lilienthal♦, gnat, Joel Etherton Jan 25 '16 at 13:17
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave these specific reasons:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Dawny33, HorusKol, Joel Etherton
- "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – Lilienthal, gnat
closed as off-topic by Dawny33, HorusKol, Lilienthal♦, gnat, Joel Etherton Jan 25 '16 at 13:17
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave these specific reasons:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Dawny33, HorusKol, Joel Etherton
- "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – Lilienthal, gnat
1
Where is your evidence for "can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship"? Is this just anecdotal
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 8:45
2
This isn't strong enough for an answer, but I'm not sure that hiring someone that doesn't have a visa is the same as discrimination based on citizenship. There's a difference between saying that you won't hire someone because they are a citizen of a particular country and saying that you won't hire someone because they don't have the appropriate visas to work in the US (and you won't pay for the visas). I think it's up to the company if they want to sponsor a visa. I believe it's OK to not hire someone who isn't qualified to work in the US.
– Thomas Owens
Jan 24 '16 at 12:25
1
"Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?" Notice that phrase is "our policy". It doesn't say what happens when the law conflicts with "our policy", but I think we can guess. For example, it may well be my company's policy to be 100% OK with giving qualified nationals from country XYZ a job. But if it turns out that the local laws say that we can't do that...
– Brandin
Jan 24 '16 at 15:04
This is a site for practical, workplace-related questions. Not a debate platform. And as others have mentioned, discriminating on employment eligibility is legal, rational and different from discriminating on citizenship.
– Lilienthal♦
Jan 25 '16 at 9:57
There are non-citizens who can legally work and there are those who can't. I would say a company that doesn't base hiring on citizenship will draw the line at hiring people illegally. You can't discriminate on age, but we still have child-labor laws in the US.
– user8365
Jan 25 '16 at 14:54
 |Â
show 1 more comment
1
Where is your evidence for "can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship"? Is this just anecdotal
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 8:45
2
This isn't strong enough for an answer, but I'm not sure that hiring someone that doesn't have a visa is the same as discrimination based on citizenship. There's a difference between saying that you won't hire someone because they are a citizen of a particular country and saying that you won't hire someone because they don't have the appropriate visas to work in the US (and you won't pay for the visas). I think it's up to the company if they want to sponsor a visa. I believe it's OK to not hire someone who isn't qualified to work in the US.
– Thomas Owens
Jan 24 '16 at 12:25
1
"Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?" Notice that phrase is "our policy". It doesn't say what happens when the law conflicts with "our policy", but I think we can guess. For example, it may well be my company's policy to be 100% OK with giving qualified nationals from country XYZ a job. But if it turns out that the local laws say that we can't do that...
– Brandin
Jan 24 '16 at 15:04
This is a site for practical, workplace-related questions. Not a debate platform. And as others have mentioned, discriminating on employment eligibility is legal, rational and different from discriminating on citizenship.
– Lilienthal♦
Jan 25 '16 at 9:57
There are non-citizens who can legally work and there are those who can't. I would say a company that doesn't base hiring on citizenship will draw the line at hiring people illegally. You can't discriminate on age, but we still have child-labor laws in the US.
– user8365
Jan 25 '16 at 14:54
1
1
Where is your evidence for "can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship"? Is this just anecdotal
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 8:45
Where is your evidence for "can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship"? Is this just anecdotal
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 8:45
2
2
This isn't strong enough for an answer, but I'm not sure that hiring someone that doesn't have a visa is the same as discrimination based on citizenship. There's a difference between saying that you won't hire someone because they are a citizen of a particular country and saying that you won't hire someone because they don't have the appropriate visas to work in the US (and you won't pay for the visas). I think it's up to the company if they want to sponsor a visa. I believe it's OK to not hire someone who isn't qualified to work in the US.
– Thomas Owens
Jan 24 '16 at 12:25
This isn't strong enough for an answer, but I'm not sure that hiring someone that doesn't have a visa is the same as discrimination based on citizenship. There's a difference between saying that you won't hire someone because they are a citizen of a particular country and saying that you won't hire someone because they don't have the appropriate visas to work in the US (and you won't pay for the visas). I think it's up to the company if they want to sponsor a visa. I believe it's OK to not hire someone who isn't qualified to work in the US.
– Thomas Owens
Jan 24 '16 at 12:25
1
1
"Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?" Notice that phrase is "our policy". It doesn't say what happens when the law conflicts with "our policy", but I think we can guess. For example, it may well be my company's policy to be 100% OK with giving qualified nationals from country XYZ a job. But if it turns out that the local laws say that we can't do that...
– Brandin
Jan 24 '16 at 15:04
"Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?" Notice that phrase is "our policy". It doesn't say what happens when the law conflicts with "our policy", but I think we can guess. For example, it may well be my company's policy to be 100% OK with giving qualified nationals from country XYZ a job. But if it turns out that the local laws say that we can't do that...
– Brandin
Jan 24 '16 at 15:04
This is a site for practical, workplace-related questions. Not a debate platform. And as others have mentioned, discriminating on employment eligibility is legal, rational and different from discriminating on citizenship.
– Lilienthal♦
Jan 25 '16 at 9:57
This is a site for practical, workplace-related questions. Not a debate platform. And as others have mentioned, discriminating on employment eligibility is legal, rational and different from discriminating on citizenship.
– Lilienthal♦
Jan 25 '16 at 9:57
There are non-citizens who can legally work and there are those who can't. I would say a company that doesn't base hiring on citizenship will draw the line at hiring people illegally. You can't discriminate on age, but we still have child-labor laws in the US.
– user8365
Jan 25 '16 at 14:54
There are non-citizens who can legally work and there are those who can't. I would say a company that doesn't base hiring on citizenship will draw the line at hiring people illegally. You can't discriminate on age, but we still have child-labor laws in the US.
– user8365
Jan 25 '16 at 14:54
 |Â
show 1 more comment
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
Compare
Hiring this candidate would require us to help with the visa process. It's expensive and time consuming and if it fails we will have to repeat the hiring process
Or
This candidate is a dual US and French citizen. That could smooth the paperwork if we ever transferred him to the European division.
With
That name sounds Arab. We don't want foreigners.
Or
With that last name, he probably needs a visa. Don't even waste your time with the phone screen.
Or
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?
Not discriminating on the basis of something doesn't mean ignoring it. It means only considering it in the very few cases where it's relevant to the job, and if it's never relevant to the job, not considering it.
Also, once a company has helped with the visa process, or hired a noncitizen who is in the country legally, that statement says that promotions, salary, and working conditions won't be affected by those things - they won't pay married people more, or assume single people can work weekends, or give better offices to citizens than to noncitizens, and so on.
The fact that for some (not all) applicants citizenship may be briefly relevant during the hiring process doesn't negate the entirety of the statement.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 14:39
Kate Gregory
104k40230331
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?Is this just making a point or have you actually come across this line of thinking? I find it bizarre since it's possible to have dual citizenship from birth. +1 for a clear explanation on the rest
– rath
Jan 24 '16 at 15:01
2
I have been told by non hirers that dual citizens are not really Canadians. And the former government made a law that we could be deported, even though we are Canadian citizens, if we did bad enough things. So I am completely sure some employers feel that way.
– Kate Gregory
Jan 24 '16 at 15:35
Obviously that employer is totally and utterly wrong. If you have a Canadian citizenship then you have a Canadian citizenship, that's it. Whether you have any other kinds of citizenships is completely irrelevant within Canada.
– gnasher729
Jan 25 '16 at 8:47
1
@gnasher729 Maybe not completely irrelevant, if you could be deported. However, the employer should follow the advice in this answer and consider items which are relevant to the job.
– Brandin
Jan 25 '16 at 9:06
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Citizenship status is a complex issue.
If the position is one that the customer (US Government) is going to require that they have reached a certain level of citizenship, then the company has to require it.
If the job is for low pay, and the candidate needs visa sponsorship, they may feel that the cost and paperwork involved may make that candidate too expensive.
Now directly addressing your question. You may have a false assumption in the question. I went to the EEOC site to see what they say about this topic.
Learn about the various types of discrimination prohibited by the laws
enforced by EEOC. We also provide links to the relevant laws,
regulations and policy guidance, and also fact sheets, Q&As, best
practices, and other information.
- Age
- Disability
- Equal Pay/Compensation
- Genetic Information
- Harassment
- National Origin
- Pregnancy
- Race/Color
- Religion
- Retaliation
- Sex
- Sexual Harassment
Notice that citizenship is not on the list.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 12:31
mhoran_psprep
40.1k461144
No Sexual orientation - well guess US is still behind the EU
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 14:42
This is the real answer. 99 times out of 100, a companies equal opportunity policy can be summarized as: "We obey all relevant laws in jurisdictions where we do business."
– Dan Neely
Jan 24 '16 at 20:04
Actually, citizenship status discrimination in employment is prohibited by US law, but only as applied to US citizens, nationals, permanent residents, temporary residents, refugees, and asylees. See justice.gov/crt/types-discrimination
– user102008
Oct 13 '16 at 2:18
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
The employer promises not to discriminate based on national origin and citizenship.
The employer has to follow the laws, which may require checking that you have a visa that allows to work in the country, and not employing you if that kind of visa is missing. There may be laws that require the employer to only hire from one group of people if there is nobody available from another group of people to do the job.
And the employer didn't promise not to discriminate based on the difficulty to solve all legal problems that might be in the way of hiring someone.
As this was mentioned elsewhere: Having the citizenship of the hiring country will solve all the problems that might occur. If an employer promises not to discriminate on citizenship, then I cannot see any reason not to hire someone with dual citizenship.
answered Jan 25 '16 at 8:44
gnasher729
70.9k31131222
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
In a nutshell, this applies to domestic employees. It's not really for overseas people, these are usually hired purely on monetary ground or sometimes on the skillset.
It's more of a sound good statement than a reality in any case even for domestic employees. Some companies give themselves a quota of females to employ, or ethnic groups to employ, or anything else. But I have never heard of one that gives itself a quota of overseas people to employ.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 19:22
Kilisi
94.6k50216376
suggest improvements |Â
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
Compare
Hiring this candidate would require us to help with the visa process. It's expensive and time consuming and if it fails we will have to repeat the hiring process
Or
This candidate is a dual US and French citizen. That could smooth the paperwork if we ever transferred him to the European division.
With
That name sounds Arab. We don't want foreigners.
Or
With that last name, he probably needs a visa. Don't even waste your time with the phone screen.
Or
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?
Not discriminating on the basis of something doesn't mean ignoring it. It means only considering it in the very few cases where it's relevant to the job, and if it's never relevant to the job, not considering it.
Also, once a company has helped with the visa process, or hired a noncitizen who is in the country legally, that statement says that promotions, salary, and working conditions won't be affected by those things - they won't pay married people more, or assume single people can work weekends, or give better offices to citizens than to noncitizens, and so on.
The fact that for some (not all) applicants citizenship may be briefly relevant during the hiring process doesn't negate the entirety of the statement.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 14:39
Kate Gregory
104k40230331
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?Is this just making a point or have you actually come across this line of thinking? I find it bizarre since it's possible to have dual citizenship from birth. +1 for a clear explanation on the rest
– rath
Jan 24 '16 at 15:01
2
I have been told by non hirers that dual citizens are not really Canadians. And the former government made a law that we could be deported, even though we are Canadian citizens, if we did bad enough things. So I am completely sure some employers feel that way.
– Kate Gregory
Jan 24 '16 at 15:35
Obviously that employer is totally and utterly wrong. If you have a Canadian citizenship then you have a Canadian citizenship, that's it. Whether you have any other kinds of citizenships is completely irrelevant within Canada.
– gnasher729
Jan 25 '16 at 8:47
1
@gnasher729 Maybe not completely irrelevant, if you could be deported. However, the employer should follow the advice in this answer and consider items which are relevant to the job.
– Brandin
Jan 25 '16 at 9:06
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
7
down vote
Compare
Hiring this candidate would require us to help with the visa process. It's expensive and time consuming and if it fails we will have to repeat the hiring process
Or
This candidate is a dual US and French citizen. That could smooth the paperwork if we ever transferred him to the European division.
With
That name sounds Arab. We don't want foreigners.
Or
With that last name, he probably needs a visa. Don't even waste your time with the phone screen.
Or
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?
Not discriminating on the basis of something doesn't mean ignoring it. It means only considering it in the very few cases where it's relevant to the job, and if it's never relevant to the job, not considering it.
Also, once a company has helped with the visa process, or hired a noncitizen who is in the country legally, that statement says that promotions, salary, and working conditions won't be affected by those things - they won't pay married people more, or assume single people can work weekends, or give better offices to citizens than to noncitizens, and so on.
The fact that for some (not all) applicants citizenship may be briefly relevant during the hiring process doesn't negate the entirety of the statement.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 14:39
Kate Gregory
104k40230331
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?Is this just making a point or have you actually come across this line of thinking? I find it bizarre since it's possible to have dual citizenship from birth. +1 for a clear explanation on the rest
– rath
Jan 24 '16 at 15:01
2
I have been told by non hirers that dual citizens are not really Canadians. And the former government made a law that we could be deported, even though we are Canadian citizens, if we did bad enough things. So I am completely sure some employers feel that way.
– Kate Gregory
Jan 24 '16 at 15:35
Obviously that employer is totally and utterly wrong. If you have a Canadian citizenship then you have a Canadian citizenship, that's it. Whether you have any other kinds of citizenships is completely irrelevant within Canada.
– gnasher729
Jan 25 '16 at 8:47
1
@gnasher729 Maybe not completely irrelevant, if you could be deported. However, the employer should follow the advice in this answer and consider items which are relevant to the job.
– Brandin
Jan 25 '16 at 9:06
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
7
down vote
up vote
7
down vote
Compare
Hiring this candidate would require us to help with the visa process. It's expensive and time consuming and if it fails we will have to repeat the hiring process
Or
This candidate is a dual US and French citizen. That could smooth the paperwork if we ever transferred him to the European division.
With
That name sounds Arab. We don't want foreigners.
Or
With that last name, he probably needs a visa. Don't even waste your time with the phone screen.
Or
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?
Not discriminating on the basis of something doesn't mean ignoring it. It means only considering it in the very few cases where it's relevant to the job, and if it's never relevant to the job, not considering it.
Also, once a company has helped with the visa process, or hired a noncitizen who is in the country legally, that statement says that promotions, salary, and working conditions won't be affected by those things - they won't pay married people more, or assume single people can work weekends, or give better offices to citizens than to noncitizens, and so on.
The fact that for some (not all) applicants citizenship may be briefly relevant during the hiring process doesn't negate the entirety of the statement.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 14:39
Kate Gregory
104k40230331
Compare
Hiring this candidate would require us to help with the visa process. It's expensive and time consuming and if it fails we will have to repeat the hiring process
Or
This candidate is a dual US and French citizen. That could smooth the paperwork if we ever transferred him to the European division.
With
That name sounds Arab. We don't want foreigners.
Or
With that last name, he probably needs a visa. Don't even waste your time with the phone screen.
Or
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?
Not discriminating on the basis of something doesn't mean ignoring it. It means only considering it in the very few cases where it's relevant to the job, and if it's never relevant to the job, not considering it.
Also, once a company has helped with the visa process, or hired a noncitizen who is in the country legally, that statement says that promotions, salary, and working conditions won't be affected by those things - they won't pay married people more, or assume single people can work weekends, or give better offices to citizens than to noncitizens, and so on.
The fact that for some (not all) applicants citizenship may be briefly relevant during the hiring process doesn't negate the entirety of the statement.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 14:39
Kate Gregory
104k40230331
edited Jan 24 '16 at 19:24
answered Jan 24 '16 at 14:39
Kate Gregory
104k40230331
answered Jan 24 '16 at 14:39
Kate Gregory
104k40230331
answered Jan 24 '16 at 14:39
Kate Gregory
104k40230331
104k40230331
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?Is this just making a point or have you actually come across this line of thinking? I find it bizarre since it's possible to have dual citizenship from birth. +1 for a clear explanation on the rest
– rath
Jan 24 '16 at 15:01
2
I have been told by non hirers that dual citizens are not really Canadians. And the former government made a law that we could be deported, even though we are Canadian citizens, if we did bad enough things. So I am completely sure some employers feel that way.
– Kate Gregory
Jan 24 '16 at 15:35
Obviously that employer is totally and utterly wrong. If you have a Canadian citizenship then you have a Canadian citizenship, that's it. Whether you have any other kinds of citizenships is completely irrelevant within Canada.
– gnasher729
Jan 25 '16 at 8:47
1
@gnasher729 Maybe not completely irrelevant, if you could be deported. However, the employer should follow the advice in this answer and consider items which are relevant to the job.
– Brandin
Jan 25 '16 at 9:06
suggest improvements |Â
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country?Is this just making a point or have you actually come across this line of thinking? I find it bizarre since it's possible to have dual citizenship from birth. +1 for a clear explanation on the rest
– rath
Jan 24 '16 at 15:01
2
I have been told by non hirers that dual citizens are not really Canadians. And the former government made a law that we could be deported, even though we are Canadian citizens, if we did bad enough things. So I am completely sure some employers feel that way.
– Kate Gregory
Jan 24 '16 at 15:35
Obviously that employer is totally and utterly wrong. If you have a Canadian citizenship then you have a Canadian citizenship, that's it. Whether you have any other kinds of citizenships is completely irrelevant within Canada.
– gnasher729
Jan 25 '16 at 8:47
1
@gnasher729 Maybe not completely irrelevant, if you could be deported. However, the employer should follow the advice in this answer and consider items which are relevant to the job.
– Brandin
Jan 25 '16 at 9:06
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country? Is this just making a point or have you actually come across this line of thinking? I find it bizarre since it's possible to have dual citizenship from birth. +1 for a clear explanation on the rest– rath
Jan 24 '16 at 15:01
Dual citizenship? Why would I hire anyone who isn't fully committed to this country? Is this just making a point or have you actually come across this line of thinking? I find it bizarre since it's possible to have dual citizenship from birth. +1 for a clear explanation on the rest– rath
Jan 24 '16 at 15:01
2
2
I have been told by non hirers that dual citizens are not really Canadians. And the former government made a law that we could be deported, even though we are Canadian citizens, if we did bad enough things. So I am completely sure some employers feel that way.
– Kate Gregory
Jan 24 '16 at 15:35
I have been told by non hirers that dual citizens are not really Canadians. And the former government made a law that we could be deported, even though we are Canadian citizens, if we did bad enough things. So I am completely sure some employers feel that way.
– Kate Gregory
Jan 24 '16 at 15:35
Obviously that employer is totally and utterly wrong. If you have a Canadian citizenship then you have a Canadian citizenship, that's it. Whether you have any other kinds of citizenships is completely irrelevant within Canada.
– gnasher729
Jan 25 '16 at 8:47
Obviously that employer is totally and utterly wrong. If you have a Canadian citizenship then you have a Canadian citizenship, that's it. Whether you have any other kinds of citizenships is completely irrelevant within Canada.
– gnasher729
Jan 25 '16 at 8:47
1
1
@gnasher729 Maybe not completely irrelevant, if you could be deported. However, the employer should follow the advice in this answer and consider items which are relevant to the job.
– Brandin
Jan 25 '16 at 9:06
@gnasher729 Maybe not completely irrelevant, if you could be deported. However, the employer should follow the advice in this answer and consider items which are relevant to the job.
– Brandin
Jan 25 '16 at 9:06
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Citizenship status is a complex issue.
If the position is one that the customer (US Government) is going to require that they have reached a certain level of citizenship, then the company has to require it.
If the job is for low pay, and the candidate needs visa sponsorship, they may feel that the cost and paperwork involved may make that candidate too expensive.
Now directly addressing your question. You may have a false assumption in the question. I went to the EEOC site to see what they say about this topic.
Learn about the various types of discrimination prohibited by the laws
enforced by EEOC. We also provide links to the relevant laws,
regulations and policy guidance, and also fact sheets, Q&As, best
practices, and other information.
- Age
- Disability
- Equal Pay/Compensation
- Genetic Information
- Harassment
- National Origin
- Pregnancy
- Race/Color
- Religion
- Retaliation
- Sex
- Sexual Harassment
Notice that citizenship is not on the list.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 12:31
mhoran_psprep
40.1k461144
No Sexual orientation - well guess US is still behind the EU
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 14:42
This is the real answer. 99 times out of 100, a companies equal opportunity policy can be summarized as: "We obey all relevant laws in jurisdictions where we do business."
– Dan Neely
Jan 24 '16 at 20:04
Actually, citizenship status discrimination in employment is prohibited by US law, but only as applied to US citizens, nationals, permanent residents, temporary residents, refugees, and asylees. See justice.gov/crt/types-discrimination
– user102008
Oct 13 '16 at 2:18
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Citizenship status is a complex issue.
If the position is one that the customer (US Government) is going to require that they have reached a certain level of citizenship, then the company has to require it.
If the job is for low pay, and the candidate needs visa sponsorship, they may feel that the cost and paperwork involved may make that candidate too expensive.
Now directly addressing your question. You may have a false assumption in the question. I went to the EEOC site to see what they say about this topic.
Learn about the various types of discrimination prohibited by the laws
enforced by EEOC. We also provide links to the relevant laws,
regulations and policy guidance, and also fact sheets, Q&As, best
practices, and other information.
- Age
- Disability
- Equal Pay/Compensation
- Genetic Information
- Harassment
- National Origin
- Pregnancy
- Race/Color
- Religion
- Retaliation
- Sex
- Sexual Harassment
Notice that citizenship is not on the list.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 12:31
mhoran_psprep
40.1k461144
No Sexual orientation - well guess US is still behind the EU
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 14:42
This is the real answer. 99 times out of 100, a companies equal opportunity policy can be summarized as: "We obey all relevant laws in jurisdictions where we do business."
– Dan Neely
Jan 24 '16 at 20:04
Actually, citizenship status discrimination in employment is prohibited by US law, but only as applied to US citizens, nationals, permanent residents, temporary residents, refugees, and asylees. See justice.gov/crt/types-discrimination
– user102008
Oct 13 '16 at 2:18
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Citizenship status is a complex issue.
If the position is one that the customer (US Government) is going to require that they have reached a certain level of citizenship, then the company has to require it.
If the job is for low pay, and the candidate needs visa sponsorship, they may feel that the cost and paperwork involved may make that candidate too expensive.
Now directly addressing your question. You may have a false assumption in the question. I went to the EEOC site to see what they say about this topic.
Learn about the various types of discrimination prohibited by the laws
enforced by EEOC. We also provide links to the relevant laws,
regulations and policy guidance, and also fact sheets, Q&As, best
practices, and other information.
- Age
- Disability
- Equal Pay/Compensation
- Genetic Information
- Harassment
- National Origin
- Pregnancy
- Race/Color
- Religion
- Retaliation
- Sex
- Sexual Harassment
Notice that citizenship is not on the list.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 12:31
mhoran_psprep
40.1k461144
Citizenship status is a complex issue.
If the position is one that the customer (US Government) is going to require that they have reached a certain level of citizenship, then the company has to require it.
If the job is for low pay, and the candidate needs visa sponsorship, they may feel that the cost and paperwork involved may make that candidate too expensive.
Now directly addressing your question. You may have a false assumption in the question. I went to the EEOC site to see what they say about this topic.
Learn about the various types of discrimination prohibited by the laws
enforced by EEOC. We also provide links to the relevant laws,
regulations and policy guidance, and also fact sheets, Q&As, best
practices, and other information.
- Age
- Disability
- Equal Pay/Compensation
- Genetic Information
- Harassment
- National Origin
- Pregnancy
- Race/Color
- Religion
- Retaliation
- Sex
- Sexual Harassment
Notice that citizenship is not on the list.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 12:31
mhoran_psprep
40.1k461144
answered Jan 24 '16 at 12:31
mhoran_psprep
40.1k461144
answered Jan 24 '16 at 12:31
mhoran_psprep
40.1k461144
answered Jan 24 '16 at 12:31
mhoran_psprep
40.1k461144
40.1k461144
No Sexual orientation - well guess US is still behind the EU
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 14:42
This is the real answer. 99 times out of 100, a companies equal opportunity policy can be summarized as: "We obey all relevant laws in jurisdictions where we do business."
– Dan Neely
Jan 24 '16 at 20:04
Actually, citizenship status discrimination in employment is prohibited by US law, but only as applied to US citizens, nationals, permanent residents, temporary residents, refugees, and asylees. See justice.gov/crt/types-discrimination
– user102008
Oct 13 '16 at 2:18
suggest improvements |Â
No Sexual orientation - well guess US is still behind the EU
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 14:42
This is the real answer. 99 times out of 100, a companies equal opportunity policy can be summarized as: "We obey all relevant laws in jurisdictions where we do business."
– Dan Neely
Jan 24 '16 at 20:04
Actually, citizenship status discrimination in employment is prohibited by US law, but only as applied to US citizens, nationals, permanent residents, temporary residents, refugees, and asylees. See justice.gov/crt/types-discrimination
– user102008
Oct 13 '16 at 2:18
No Sexual orientation - well guess US is still behind the EU
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 14:42
No Sexual orientation - well guess US is still behind the EU
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 14:42
This is the real answer. 99 times out of 100, a companies equal opportunity policy can be summarized as: "We obey all relevant laws in jurisdictions where we do business."
– Dan Neely
Jan 24 '16 at 20:04
This is the real answer. 99 times out of 100, a companies equal opportunity policy can be summarized as: "We obey all relevant laws in jurisdictions where we do business."
– Dan Neely
Jan 24 '16 at 20:04
Actually, citizenship status discrimination in employment is prohibited by US law, but only as applied to US citizens, nationals, permanent residents, temporary residents, refugees, and asylees. See justice.gov/crt/types-discrimination
– user102008
Oct 13 '16 at 2:18
Actually, citizenship status discrimination in employment is prohibited by US law, but only as applied to US citizens, nationals, permanent residents, temporary residents, refugees, and asylees. See justice.gov/crt/types-discrimination
– user102008
Oct 13 '16 at 2:18
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
The employer promises not to discriminate based on national origin and citizenship.
The employer has to follow the laws, which may require checking that you have a visa that allows to work in the country, and not employing you if that kind of visa is missing. There may be laws that require the employer to only hire from one group of people if there is nobody available from another group of people to do the job.
And the employer didn't promise not to discriminate based on the difficulty to solve all legal problems that might be in the way of hiring someone.
As this was mentioned elsewhere: Having the citizenship of the hiring country will solve all the problems that might occur. If an employer promises not to discriminate on citizenship, then I cannot see any reason not to hire someone with dual citizenship.
answered Jan 25 '16 at 8:44
gnasher729
70.9k31131222
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
The employer promises not to discriminate based on national origin and citizenship.
The employer has to follow the laws, which may require checking that you have a visa that allows to work in the country, and not employing you if that kind of visa is missing. There may be laws that require the employer to only hire from one group of people if there is nobody available from another group of people to do the job.
And the employer didn't promise not to discriminate based on the difficulty to solve all legal problems that might be in the way of hiring someone.
As this was mentioned elsewhere: Having the citizenship of the hiring country will solve all the problems that might occur. If an employer promises not to discriminate on citizenship, then I cannot see any reason not to hire someone with dual citizenship.
answered Jan 25 '16 at 8:44
gnasher729
70.9k31131222
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
The employer promises not to discriminate based on national origin and citizenship.
The employer has to follow the laws, which may require checking that you have a visa that allows to work in the country, and not employing you if that kind of visa is missing. There may be laws that require the employer to only hire from one group of people if there is nobody available from another group of people to do the job.
And the employer didn't promise not to discriminate based on the difficulty to solve all legal problems that might be in the way of hiring someone.
As this was mentioned elsewhere: Having the citizenship of the hiring country will solve all the problems that might occur. If an employer promises not to discriminate on citizenship, then I cannot see any reason not to hire someone with dual citizenship.
answered Jan 25 '16 at 8:44
gnasher729
70.9k31131222
The employer promises not to discriminate based on national origin and citizenship.
The employer has to follow the laws, which may require checking that you have a visa that allows to work in the country, and not employing you if that kind of visa is missing. There may be laws that require the employer to only hire from one group of people if there is nobody available from another group of people to do the job.
And the employer didn't promise not to discriminate based on the difficulty to solve all legal problems that might be in the way of hiring someone.
As this was mentioned elsewhere: Having the citizenship of the hiring country will solve all the problems that might occur. If an employer promises not to discriminate on citizenship, then I cannot see any reason not to hire someone with dual citizenship.
answered Jan 25 '16 at 8:44
gnasher729
70.9k31131222
edited Jan 25 '16 at 8:50
answered Jan 25 '16 at 8:44
gnasher729
70.9k31131222
answered Jan 25 '16 at 8:44
gnasher729
70.9k31131222
answered Jan 25 '16 at 8:44
gnasher729
70.9k31131222
70.9k31131222
suggest improvements |Â
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
In a nutshell, this applies to domestic employees. It's not really for overseas people, these are usually hired purely on monetary ground or sometimes on the skillset.
It's more of a sound good statement than a reality in any case even for domestic employees. Some companies give themselves a quota of females to employ, or ethnic groups to employ, or anything else. But I have never heard of one that gives itself a quota of overseas people to employ.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 19:22
Kilisi
94.6k50216376
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
In a nutshell, this applies to domestic employees. It's not really for overseas people, these are usually hired purely on monetary ground or sometimes on the skillset.
It's more of a sound good statement than a reality in any case even for domestic employees. Some companies give themselves a quota of females to employ, or ethnic groups to employ, or anything else. But I have never heard of one that gives itself a quota of overseas people to employ.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 19:22
Kilisi
94.6k50216376
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
In a nutshell, this applies to domestic employees. It's not really for overseas people, these are usually hired purely on monetary ground or sometimes on the skillset.
It's more of a sound good statement than a reality in any case even for domestic employees. Some companies give themselves a quota of females to employ, or ethnic groups to employ, or anything else. But I have never heard of one that gives itself a quota of overseas people to employ.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 19:22
Kilisi
94.6k50216376
In a nutshell, this applies to domestic employees. It's not really for overseas people, these are usually hired purely on monetary ground or sometimes on the skillset.
It's more of a sound good statement than a reality in any case even for domestic employees. Some companies give themselves a quota of females to employ, or ethnic groups to employ, or anything else. But I have never heard of one that gives itself a quota of overseas people to employ.
answered Jan 24 '16 at 19:22
Kilisi
94.6k50216376
answered Jan 24 '16 at 19:22
Kilisi
94.6k50216376
answered Jan 24 '16 at 19:22
Kilisi
94.6k50216376
answered Jan 24 '16 at 19:22
Kilisi
94.6k50216376
94.6k50216376
suggest improvements |Â
suggest improvements |Â
1
Where is your evidence for "can and do routinely discriminate on the basis of citizenship"? Is this just anecdotal
– Ed Heal
Jan 24 '16 at 8:45
2
This isn't strong enough for an answer, but I'm not sure that hiring someone that doesn't have a visa is the same as discrimination based on citizenship. There's a difference between saying that you won't hire someone because they are a citizen of a particular country and saying that you won't hire someone because they don't have the appropriate visas to work in the US (and you won't pay for the visas). I think it's up to the company if they want to sponsor a visa. I believe it's OK to not hire someone who isn't qualified to work in the US.
– Thomas Owens
Jan 24 '16 at 12:25
1
"Restricting attention to the citizenship bit, what does the above clause actually do for anyone?" Notice that phrase is "our policy". It doesn't say what happens when the law conflicts with "our policy", but I think we can guess. For example, it may well be my company's policy to be 100% OK with giving qualified nationals from country XYZ a job. But if it turns out that the local laws say that we can't do that...
– Brandin
Jan 24 '16 at 15:04
This is a site for practical, workplace-related questions. Not a debate platform. And as others have mentioned, discriminating on employment eligibility is legal, rational and different from discriminating on citizenship.
– Lilienthal♦
Jan 25 '16 at 9:57
There are non-citizens who can legally work and there are those who can't. I would say a company that doesn't base hiring on citizenship will draw the line at hiring people illegally. You can't discriminate on age, but we still have child-labor laws in the US.
– user8365
Jan 25 '16 at 14:54