Zera's Blog

A Citizen's View from Main Street

Proposed New Jersey Law Would Penalize Employers For Discriminating Against Unemployed



This law is too broad in that it makes no exception for internal transfer opportunities. As written, it could be interpreted to prohibit efforts to retain existing workers through internal placement.

This law could also be leveraged to downsize higher-paid employees and then hire lower-paid replacements.

I like the basic idea, but when I look at a law, I look for how it could be misunderstood or abused. Ambiguities and generalities are generally bad.

An Act concerning employment discrimination and supplementing Title 34 of the Revised Statutes.

Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:

1.    No employer or employer’s agent, representative, or designee shall publish, in print or on the Internet, an advertisement for any job vacancy that contains one or more of the following:

a.     Any provision stating or suggesting that the qualifications for a job include current employment;

b.    Any provision stating or suggesting that the employer or employer’s agent, representative, or designee will not consider or review an application for employment submitted by any job applicant currently unemployed; or

c.     Any provision stating or suggesting that the employer or employer’s agent, representative, or designee will only consider or review applications for employment submitted by job applicants who are currently employed.

2.    Any employer who violates this act shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $5,000 for the first violation and $10,000 for each subsequent violation, collectible by the Commissioner of Labor and Workforce Development in a summary proceeding pursuant to the “Penalty Enforcement Law of 1999,” P.L.1999, c.274 (C.2A:58-10 et seq.).

3.    This act shall take effect immediately.

STATEMENT

This bill prohibits an employer or employer’s agent, representative, or designee to publish, in print or on the Internet, an advertisement for any job vacancy that prohibits, announces or suggests that unemployed individuals need not apply for a job vacancy. The bill provides for the imposition of civil penalties, for a violation of the bill, in an amount not to exceed $5,000 for the first violation, or $10,000 for each subsequent violation, collectible by the Commissioner of Labor and Workforce Development.

An Act concerning employment discrimination and supplementing Title 34 of the Revised Statutes.

I worked for a large company for many years, and transferred internally on several occasions. Such transfers promote job stability and reduce training costs, both of which are desirable. If the law stated that external candidates cannot be required to have a current job, then that would be a different story.

Just shuffling people from one company to another does not increase employment. I hope the tax holiday for new hires is limited to hiring the unemployed. There should be an increase in head count involved.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

An Act concerning employment discrimination and supplementing Title 34 of the Revised Statutes.

October 15, 2010 Posted by | Capitalism, Labor, Regulation | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The End of the Tunnel


Paul Krugman, Laureate of the Sveriges Riksban...

Paul Krugman - Image via Wikipedia

Once again, Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey, is looking at the future of his state through the eyes of a gambler. Last time, it was the gaming industry. I guess his plans for building up a tourism economy do not include access to the NYC market. This is an aspect of killing the tunnel that Mr. Krugman did not mention in his article.

He was right to criticize it as thwarting economic stimulus and recovery.

Republicans do not like to pay for anything, no matter how useful. If it had been up to them, we would never have become a world power.
NYT,Paul Krugman: The End of the Tunnel

October 14, 2010 Posted by | Direction, Economics | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

New Jersey to Double Down on an Industry in Decline?


Christie’s plan. To reach right past “moral hazard” and “let them fail” to hit the “government intervention” button.

Welcome to the progressive side of the street. Maybe. Let’s kick some tires here.

First of all, there is that pesky drop in market share. Do you have a root-cause analysis of why that happened? Has anyone done a feasibility study? Or is he blindly supporting what may prove to be a buggy-whip economy? At least he acknowledged that it would increase crime.

The first businesses to return to New Orleans after Katrina were the casinos and hotels, even before housing. Around here, conservative candidates are talking about adding racino and riverboat gambling to Indian casinos, the failing horse track, and a whole array of lotteries and scratch-offs.

Las Vegas is struggling. Continue reading

July 30, 2010 Posted by | Capitalism, Direction, Economics | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: