Should American citizens be given job preference?

[drkaje]

If they're equally qualified, should citizenship be a factor?

The conversation is happening on another website and I'm curious what people here think.

[_aj_]

In the US? Of course. Why is this even a valid debate?

[Tapeworm]

Yes, if for no other reason than a citizen is less likely to disappear when his visa expires.

The argument is meaningless tho.  No two applicants are so equal that this becomes the only deciding factor.  For example, the foreigner probably got a more well rounded education since the American public school system is for shit.  Of course, the American's lunch won't make the place smell funny and lead to lost productivity while arguments ensue, yet the non-citizen will probably do the work of 3 fat, lazy citizens despite leaving footprints on the toilet seat cuz that's how they poop from there.  There are many factors.

[_bruce_]

European minority groups, like me, should be given a Huge(in bodybuilding terms) advantage relative to their welfare resume when applying for a high payed job inside the US.
America needs "change" more than ever  

Kidding aside - any sane mind makes use of what's already abundant, so the answer should be obvious.

[Tapeworm]

European minority groups, like me, should be given a Huge(in bodybuilding terms) advantage relative to their welfare resume when applying for a high payed job inside the US.
America needs "change" more than ever  

Kidding aside - any sane mind makes use of what's already abundant, so the answer should be obvious.

Wetbacks.  Got it.

[King Shizzo]

If they're equally qualified, should citizenship be a factor?

The conversation is happening on another website and I'm curious what people here think.

It all depends on who the hiring managers feel would be the best fit for the company. Qualifications are just a piece of the puzzle.

So I would say that it should be on a case by case basis. I am all for a foreigner getting a job over an American, if they can beat them fair and square during the hiring process.

[_aj_]

It all depends on who the hiring managers feel would be the best fit for the company. Qualifications are just a piece of the puzzle.

So I would say that it should be on a case by case basis. I am all for a foreigner getting a job over an American, if they can beat them fair and square during the hiring process.

Aren't you that guy that sucks dicks from that other thread?

[Tapeworm]

Why don't you just go ahead and link us to the thread on the other website so we can head on over to enlighten them? 

[f450]

citizens should always come first.

There should be no debate about that

[HTexan]

If they're equally qualified, should citizenship be a factor?

The conversation is happening on another website and I'm curious what people here think.

Of course not. No big company is going to limit their pool of employees based on citizenship.
This only hurts them, and the US.
Hell we scooped up albert einstein from Germany, and tesla from Croatia.

[youandme]

Citizenship for government jobs can be a factor if the job is related to democracy and self government. Jobs like teaching, police, jury duty, etc.

[ProudVirgin69]

citizens should always come first.

There should be no debate about that

There's something to be said for the benefits of a diverse workforce. 

Of course, this can't just be a one-way street....Europe, for example, seems to hold on to their work visas like their balls

[OB1]

I'd say generally yes, but qualification should also be taken into account.

[Las Vegas]

In the US? Of course. Why is this even a valid debate?

Yes, very sad that we have these traitorous people who would even put it up for question (not you, drkaje, but some of the dipshits in this thread).

[_bruce_]

Yes, very sad that we have these traitorous people who would even put it up for question (not you, drkaje, but some of the dipshits in this thread).

x2

[OB1]

Yes, very sad that we have these traitorous people who would even put it up for question (not you, drkaje, but some of the dipshits in this thread).

Did you just call me dipshit?

[Irongrip400]

Why don't you just go ahead and link us to the thread on the other website so we can head on over to enlighten them? 

Lol, I've got my pitchfork and torch.

[drkaje]

Why don't you just go ahead and link us to the thread on the other website so we can head on over to enlighten them? 

I appreciate the offer but they'd just see it as American entitlement, LOL!

[HonestBob]

Slightly at a tangent, but is affirmative action / quota filling encouraged in private US based companies?

My company is opening in the US and based on our current demographic we're not too PC. Approx 100 staff, zero blacks, and 7 women.

[240 is Back]

depends.   do they even lift?

[drkaje]

Slightly at a tangent, but is affirmative action / quota filling encouraged in private US based companies?

My company is opening in the US and based on our current demographic we're not too PC. Approx 100 staff, zero blacks, and 7 women.

It depends upon whether or not the company has specific goals or want to reach a new demographic. Regardless of qualifications, people will assume the only black guy is there due to affirmative action. Black lesbians (with advanced degrees) probably turn down job offers on a daily basis, LOL!

I was asking about a taxpayer-funded situation, though.

[youandme]

Slightly at a tangent, but is affirmative action / quota filling encouraged in private US based companies?

My company is opening in the US and based on our current demographic we're not too PC. Approx 100 staff, zero blacks, and 7 women.

drkaje is right on target with the "goals"

But encouraged? No, unless you want a lazy ass workforce that knows that they can file suit for discrimination since they know you fear such lawsuits and have put a plan in place.

Quota filling is reverse discrimination and will lead a paper trail for future lawsuits.

No blacks? Depends on what market you work in and educational level you need. Also, are there really that many blacks where you live? Likely not discrimination just because you have no blacks jobs are given based on merit not the color of skin.   

Taxpayer funded situations depend on whether your business takes over a public function that is normally reserved for government (prison) or how intertwined the government's actions are to a point in which the government affirms your company's actions.  It takes a lot.

[drkaje]

drkaje is right on target with the "goals"

But encouraged? No, unless you want a lazy ass workforce that knows that they can file suit for discrimination since they know you fear such lawsuits and have put a plan in place.

Quota filling is reverse discrimination and will lead a paper trail for future lawsuits.

No blacks? Depends on what market you work in and educational level you need. Also, are there really that many blacks where you live? Likely not discrimination just because you have no blacks jobs are given based on merit not the color of skin.   

Taxpayer funded situations depend on whether your business takes over a public function that is normally reserved for government (prison) or how intertwined the government's actions are to a point in which the government affirms your company's actions.  It takes a lot.

It also depends upon the area. Anyplace too rural and education doesn't really figure into people's minds. The assume it's affirmative action or think the search should have continued until finding someone white.

[Tapeworm]

While we're playing goofy hypothetical:

So what if an employer is perfectly willing to hire a minority but he knows he'll lose customers because he's the only non-bigot in Bigotville.  Is he guilty of discrimination if he doesn't hire the minority who will cause the business to fail because all the customers are bigots?

[Las Vegas]

Did you just call me dipshit?

Looks like it was several people I called that.