Ed Kaim - Why I'm Against Some Discrimination Laws

July 2008

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

Navigation

Developer Marketing

Home

SharpLogic Software

Blogroll

Friday, May 06, 2005

Why I'm Against Some Discrimination Laws

I just came across http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7762073/ and saw that Microsoft's management has decided to unilaterally use the company's influence to support the bill, which will probably be useful to its proponents. There was a lot of controversy over this a few weeks ago (http://www.sharplogic.com/blogs/ed/PermaLink,guid,84ba33c2-8bb2-4ec8-8f3e-706bddb27295.aspx) and it's very interesting to see the company take a side now. Sadly, this derails a lot of credibility from Steve Ballmer's memo from a few weeks ago since this action directly contradicts the reasoning behind not taking a side. My guess is that Microsoft's management was blindsided by how big of an issue this would be and did research that determined the negativity from supporters of the bill greatly outweighed the negativity of those who did not support the bill, so changing the stance would result in a net positive. The saddest part of this is that some individuals will take credit for the "victory" (Robert!) because they know Microsoft will never divulge the actual reason for the flip flop.

I have very mixed feelings towards the bill. To begin with, I feel that if you're going to outlaw discrimination based on gender, race, creed, etc, then you must also include sexual orientation. Since there is enough clout in the state government to support those anti-discrimination laws, people with different sexual preferences should be protected as anyone else. There are obviously degrees to which sexual preference is still considered unacceptable regarding age and species, but that's not my focus here.

The part of HB1515 I strongly disagree with is actually not in HB1515, it's in some of the laws HB1515 is looking to amend. I am personally against state laws barring business discrimination. While I oppose discrimination myself and will never practice it, I believe that each business should be given the right to discriminate if it so chooses--for any reason. I hate the idea that I am not allowed to not hire the people I don't want to hire for any reason I want. For example, I may feel that an individual is highly qualified for a job after our interview. However, that person may belong to a religion that strongly opposes the idea of computer programmers, and is hell-bent on making their lives miserable. Unfortunately, as a business owner, my hands are tied! I *have* to hire that person because I'm not allowed to discriminate against qualified applicants purely based on religion.

While I am fully against business discrimination laws, I do feel that it would be appropriate for businesses and the government to require certain policies from their vendors. For example, my company does a lot of work for Microsoft, so having to provide proof that we are an equal opportunity employer would be a reasonable requirement. In the end, companies who choose to discriminate for the wrong reasons would be hurting themselves and would eventually die out to competitors who hire the best people for the job. Also, if a company is only hiring you because they're not allowed not to, then do you really want that job?

Just to reiterate--and avoid a misplaced flame war--I am completely against discrimination and agree with the essence of the bill. I just don't agree that the government should be unnaturally forcing something like this on businesses. The ironic thing is that I'm so against a law that I would actively obey even if it didn't exist.

5/6/2005 1:00:00 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)