Sounds like you'll at least look at their resumes instead of publicly saying you won't..... Looks like you are in compliance with the law. We thank you!
The most qualified person should be hired.... but according to the law that the Trump administration followed you can't outright not even consider them.
It might be a different story if I had a rocket business with sensitive and security concerns- I may not accept the trust me bro resumes
[Business Insider] Elon Musk's tweet is cited in a new DOJ lawsuit accusing SpaceX of routine discrimination against refugees Again..... you don't have to hire anyone but you can't outright not even consider them. Jesus would have at least looked over their resumes...
Again.... you don't have to hire them, you just can't discriminate by outright saying you won't hire them. Jesus wouldn't discriminate. Savvy? LOL.... you with a rocket business..... LOL, thanks for that.
Welp.... I've sufficiently owned you and clearly you are at the stage of pure trolling. A real man would just admit he was wrong..... but you are a soy boy beta cuck I win, you lose.
I've lost nothing ...I ..am ..atomic I am all about refugees getting jobs I really am-honestly- I'm all about following the law- Unlike some idiots , I also recognize there are security issues that need to be considered regarding applications st SpaceX and honestly, it is a lot more attractive, hiring someone with a paper trail with verifiable credentials.... Anyone with common sense, would agree with me on this, regardless of party politics... Now there is something called cover your a.s.s which goes around what would normally be common sense for the sake of fulfilling legal requirements... there is no doubt having a qualified citizen with a paper trail with verifiable connections is favorable towards having a hiring candidate over someone that has a shady background with very limited verifiable connections. (Considering the very sensitive security nature of the company) I think that would be both fair and savvy if I dare say should SpaceX implement a cover your a.s.s hiring process ? probably so- is this a waste of time probably so- this affect actual hiring ? probably not- Was the lawsuit necessary ? No- I think this was a case of a company being very concerned about who they hire not being anti-refugee stance - it's real simple. Solution: Let the company be able to sign a waiver as overseen by the government that exempts liability if something happens down the line that causes harm from the hire of the refugee - this would likely increase the chance that a potential refugee that might be qualified gets hired if that's what we care about
Just when the wokes think they got me surrounded.. ps ...- let's not forget Klaus Fuchs was a refugee also - guess what he did ..
I'm not seeing "weaponization." I mean, do you just want DOJ to skip the rules that Congress has set out in the cases of celebrity conservative business owners or politicians? (That's rhetorical, you don't have to say "exactly, yes" out loud.) If you don't like the rules, you try to win some elections and change the rules. Y'all know this routine. It's not weaponizing if someone you like happens to break rules. Would Florida be weaponizing traffic laws if they pulled over my California car for doing 95 in a 45-mph construction zone? "Oh, it's b/c I'm from California and y'all hating!" Um, don't drive 95 in a 45, idiot B-Bob. And don't run afoul the dept. of labor, and don't try to overthrow validated elections, etc.
Selective enforcement. How many companies do you think are not hiring these folks? And how many of them is the DOJ going after? And after Biden threatened publicly that "there's many ways" to go after Musk.
Yeah, that was really stupid (at least out of context -- haven't watched that whole presser or whatever). Every human should keep an eye on their biases. We're always more sensitive to infractions from those we don't like or those who aren't in our perceived group. So, to that extent, I think the questions are worth asking. But DOJ is a massive thing that is not especially partisan. People work there for their careers often times -- not like a new slate of political hacks every four years (even though I guess some people would like that). As in, the investigation into Jan. 6 began via "Trump's" DOJ. Biden hadn't been inaugurated. But those folks were collecting info on the shenanigans on Jan. 7. The good thing about the bureaucracy (and there's a ton that is not good) is that it has inertia and doesn't usually respond well to one partisan's whims, like "let's go get this person from the other team!"
Sorry… you wanted to go the “trust me bro” route instead of having a discussion like a man. I won, you lost.
