Hacker News Reader

Comment by SeanBoocock | Hacker News Reader

Political opinions are not protected in the same way, nor should they be, as the protected classes you cite (gender identity, sexual orientation, ethnicity, etc).

View on HN

Oh, really? I am not from the US, so I am a bit ignorant about the laws there.

In France it is illegal to discriminate against an employee because of his political views.

It is not allowed to ask.

What if they have extreme political views? Are you allowed to wear KKK robes to work?

Having some political views and expressing them at the workplace are different things - that's the whole point of this thread.

If your views are that extreme maybe it isn't a workplace that should be taking action? Just a thought

Why jump to the extreme? There are plenty of people who seemingly behave “normally”, but are internally sympathetic to some abhorrent views. Does that mean they can’t write JavaScript as well as the next person? If I’m privy to their beliefs that I find disagreeable, does that mean I should “out” them, even if their internalized beliefs have no discernible effect on the workplace?

I’m trying to find my place in the conversation as well. More questions bubble up the more I think. Do I really care that my neighbor is racist if I never interact with them?

From the employer's perspective, the definition of "extreme political views" would be the labor rights / pro-union parties (wherever there's not a two-party first-past-the-post system like USA, those often are explicit separate parties) and the communist party, but the working class would very much want that employers don't get to make that decision.

The criteria for too extreme should not be specific to employment. If some organization is considered too bad to exist (e.g. the Nazi party in post-WW2 germany), then it should be dismantled as such, but if the country considers a political movement legitimate enough to participate in elections and gain seats in government, then obviously supporting that organization or membership in it shouldn't be an obstacle for employment as well. I have no idea on what the legal status (if any) of KKK is today in USA, but whatever it is, IMHO it should be the same both for politics and employment.

KKK robes? No

talk about white people are evil? yes

Here's the best I could find... I was a little bewildered by this, TBH. I thought, as long as your political beliefs didn't cause a distraction at work to yourself or others, you were safe from being fired. Guess I was wrong. At least on a federal level. Different states have different rules:

https://sanfordheisler.com/can-you-be-fired-for-your-politic...

There are only a couple of US states that have something along the lines of "or political beliefs" appended to their workplace discrimination laws. In most US states, it's perfectly legal to announce that you're firing all Democrats, effective immediately. In those couple of states you wouldn't want to announce that, though you could still lay them all off and dare them to try to prove it in court (very difficult unless you've explicitly announced).

can't ask here either but easy to figure out by source

Get referred through the favored group, you meet political requirements

Religion is a protected class. Why not politics?

We either need to add more protected classes or do away with the whole concept and return to free association.

implying politics isn't a religion in America.

I’d remove religion. Adults choose their beliefs, both political and spiritual.

Beliefs aren't chosen, or at least they are very "sticky".

What you chose is how you let those beliefs inform your actions

Yes they are.

Race and sex and sexual attraction are innate qualities.

People can and do change their beliefs - I’m not sure why anyone would say otherwise as they can easily confirm this for themselves.

Setting aside the question of whether beliefs are influenced by genetics, there's no dichotomy between 'innate' and 'choice.' My religion or political views may not be 'innate' (whatever that means), but they are also not a choice. Can they change over time? Yes!

But not because I woke up and made the free choice that today, I will believe something else. You cannot simply decide to truly believe something else in the same way I could choose between two appetizers on the menu. You cannot choose to legitimately hold a belief. (You could choose to pretend to hold a belief.) If you don't believe me, try choosing to believe Nazi ideology is right and true.

I would actually say sexual orientation is quite similar. Someone cannot simply choose their sexual orientation. A huge conflux of factors come into play, such that people develop a sexual orientation. It may change as we 'discover' new things about ourselves, but there's no choice involved in how we feel.

People chose to adopt or to leave nazism all the time as well (that said it’s not a particularly common belief).

Sure people changes their beliefs - something I thought was true turns out to be no longer true, I no longer believe in it. I think you’re trying to say that because our beliefs are based upon our judgment they’re somehow not fluid. But we chose to judge and consider ourselves.

As mentioned earlier, sex, race and sexuality are innate and deserve protection. Nobody is arguing otherwise (unless you are).

No, people do not “choose” to adopt or to drop Nazism. They might choose to join the party, or to leave it, or to do something evil that Nazis do. But they don’t choose to believe Nazi ideology or to not believe it.

You cannot change a single one of your sincerely held beliefs by simply choosing to believe otherwise.

I have no idea what you mean by “innate.” Can you explain in what sense a belief is not innate but sexual orientation is? You seem to think fluidity had something to do with it, I think, but clearly people’s sexual orientation is fluid in the same sense: people often believe they’re straight and later believe they’re bi or gay, for example.

Sex and race are externally observable fuzzy characteristics, I don’t really think especially the latter is a useful concept because it’s too fuzzy. But I can at least imagine what you mean by “innate” in this sense, something that you’re born with (sort of) and which other people can determine immediately on sight.

I've stopped being annoyed with what seemed like blanket unsupported statements and written a more patient response:

> But they don’t choose to believe Nazi ideology or to not believe it.

If one gets new information, one decides whether that information is worth changing their beliefs. That is one important distinction between innate qualities and beliefs. And yes choice is involved.

> You cannot change a single one of your sincerely held beliefs by simply choosing to believe otherwise.

I receive new information, I reevaluate my beliefs. Simple.

> people often believe they’re straight and later believe they’re bi or gay, for example.

That's true and a good point - heterosexuality (which is closely tied with the ability to reproduce) is assumed to be the default. But see the next point...

> Sex and race are externally observable fuzzy characteristics

Agreed that 'race' is a funny concept. Americans mainly seem to use it to refer to skin color vs actual ancestry. That's the sense I'm using it here.

Also sexuality is externally observable. If someone is a man and having sex with (gender here) that's externally visible. You can literally watch it.

Please change your belief about the innateness of race and sex, so that I can see the voluntary nature of beliefs in action.

Again, you can choose how you act in light of your beliefs. And beliefs do change, but at most you can choose to be open those experiences that might lead to a change in belief. Changing them is not a direct act of will.

I chose my beliefs. You don’t.

I actually think more generic worker's rights is better than expanding protected classes, which will always have holes.

Political activities and affiliations are a protected for workers in California, where most of the companies in the article are based. However in extreme cases (like if you express your beliefs in a way that creates a hostile working environment) someone can still be fired

Lawful political beliefs, affiliations, and actions are a protected attribute in Australia[0]. I have no idea whether this forces you to hire e.g. actual Nazis, although they'd probably have some unlawful beliefs.

[0] https://www.humanrights.vic.gov.au/for-individuals/political...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com