For job applications that declare absolutely nothing, the leader of the taxpayer funded anti-discrimination center, Christine Lüders, has managed to win over five large companies. The applications, which contain no photos, have neither name, address, birthday and birthplace, nor marital status.

Are the applicants allowed then to send a representative to the interview and probation time, or do they all have a sack over their head?

The FAZ writes:

In Germany, a pilot project has been begun for anonymous job applications. This was announced by the leader of the anti-discrimination office of the federal government, Christine Lüders. “We have been able to win over three large German firms from Dax and two international concerns for this project,” Lüders said to this newspaper in Berlin. Among them are the consumer goods producers Procter & Gamble and L’Oréal.

(…)

Lüders admits that this will not necessarily protect against prejudices in further employment processes. If an employer ultimately discriminates in their decision for personnel, then an accusation may be considered in any case because of the offense against the General Law for Equal Treatment. “However, sometimes it is already worth gold just be invited to get beyond censorship,” Lüders said.

At best, firms can be completely forbidden from meeting a candidate. Then in the interview, at the latest, would it be seen whether the applicant can even speak German. What that has to do with “censorship,” is beyond our knowledge.

Lüders signifies “multiple discrimination” as a special problem — like when a young woman of Turkish origin, with head covering and poor German skills, is unable receive a position or get an apartment. Gender, origin, age and religion of the affected individual all possibly come together as grounds for discrimination. Typical complaints also come from young men from Africa or Arab countries who, for example, have been refused entry at a disco by the doorkeeper. Lüders mentions the primary goal for her work as networking of various on site advice centers. Other than that, she intends to sensitize society regarding the problem of discrimination.

For what reason do we need to be sensitized? Is it because Muslim immigrants often do not master the language and have no school diploma?

Fundamental doubt has been raised by Düsseldorf economics professor Justus Haucap about the use of antidiscrimination centers that cost the taxpayer 2,8 million Euros annually. The president of the monopoly commission recommends the abolition of the Berlin authority with its staff of 22 and advisory board of 17 people. According to a study, more than 1.7 milliard (American ‘billion’) Euros in bureaucratic cost to the economy would result from the antidiscrimination law. There has been a significant increase in complaints. Haucap thinks that the German Civil and Employment Law already offers enough protection from discrimination; the Berlin center is “absolutely unnecessary.”

Well, what now? It does guarantee employment positions, and even for a good purpose!

(Hat Tip: LupulusLotarius / Translation: Anders Denken)

For job applications that declare absolutely nothing, the leader of the taxpayer funded anti-discrimination center, Christine Lüders, has managed to win over five large companies. The applications, which contain no photos, have neither name, address, birthday and birthplace, nor marital status. Are the applicants allowed then to send a representative to the interview and probation ...

PI, 14. Jul 2010 |  Print This Post |  Email This Post | post a comment    
Kategorie: Germany, Hypocrisy, Multiculti;

 Loading ...

look up...