Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!hoptoad!ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!rutgers!mit-eddie!zrm
From: zrm@mit-eddie.UUCP
Newsgroups: alt.flame
Subject: Re: Lieing to get a job (offensive assumptions)
Message-ID: <7132@eddie.MIT.EDU>
Date: Sat, 10-Oct-87 18:31:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: eddie.7132
Posted: Sat Oct 10 18:31:07 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Oct-87 01:08:24 EDT
References: <957@bc-cis.UUCP> <1839@tekig5.TEK.COM>
Reply-To: zrm@eddie.MIT.EDU (Zigurd R. Mednieks)
Organization: MIT, EE/CS Computer Facilities, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 25

I'm sorry if the turns of phrase I have used are raising people's
hackles. Some people don't see that questions like "Would you work in
a nuclear power plant?" cut both ways. Here in the People's Republic
of Cambridge, you might be considered a nut if you said yes.

Also, the main point is not whether defense contractors should hire
pro-defense employees, but that all employers have the right to hire
employees that are in tune with the strategic aims of the employer. The
discussion grew out of an example in the defense industry, but it
holds equally true in energy, medicine, or any other industry where
the views of employees may have an impact on the success of the
company.

Another issue is that potential hires do communicate, willingly or
not, with their wardrobe, their grooming, their jewelry and their
speaking style. Again, this cuts both ways. Some people don't believe
any really creative computer people know how to dress themselves or
speak clear English. Their hiring decisions are just as irrational as
the decisions of those who can never see beyond the beard and ill-
fitting suit.

So flame off and keep these issues in mind. I hope I've done my part
in restating the points clearly. If anyone disagrees, speak up!

-Zigurd