Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"Obama's labor department has made it illegal to request or require any proof of high school diploma (Original Post) proud2BlibKansan Jul 2012 OP
I seriously doubt it. Defies common sense. nt COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #1
It's not your job to verify their claim bluestateguy Jul 2012 #2
Those that assert, must first prove. Ikonoklast Jul 2012 #3
I did. He told me he wasn't going to do my research for me. proud2BlibKansan Jul 2012 #4
The classic response from those talking out of their asses arcane1 Jul 2012 #6
That's exactly how they operate. LeftofObama Jul 2012 #8
Some of them - honestly - don't know how to copy and paste a link. proud2BlibKansan Jul 2012 #13
You cannot prove a negative longship Jul 2012 #9
Then he has no source, just made-up bullshit Ikonoklast Jul 2012 #15
Will cut down College enrollments. Downwinder Jul 2012 #5
Just tell him its a lie flobee1 Jul 2012 #7
Its based, inaccurately, on a letter that the EEOC issued in 2011 onenote Jul 2012 #10
You must be a HR Pro. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2012 #12
Nah. But I have colleagues that specialize in employment law onenote Jul 2012 #17
Aha! Thanks!! proud2BlibKansan Jul 2012 #14
Okay, I've got this one ... 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2012 #11
No! obamanut2012 Jul 2012 #16
Repiglicans HAVE to lie. xfundy Jul 2012 #18

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
3. Those that assert, must first prove.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 05:38 PM
Jul 2012

It is up to the idiot that posted that to come up with the ruling or law that states this, not up to you to refute nonsense.

Ask for a direct link to the Labor Dept. ruling.

There isn't one.

proud2BlibKansan

(96,793 posts)
4. I did. He told me he wasn't going to do my research for me.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 05:39 PM
Jul 2012

I'm ready to call it a lie - I just wanted to double check before I did so.

LeftofObama

(4,243 posts)
8. That's exactly how they operate.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:17 PM
Jul 2012

Teabaggers and right wingers in general will pull some kind of bullshit out of their ass and then dare you to prove them wrong. When you don't even know where to begin to debunk all of their nonsense they will say, "See! you can't prove it's not true, so it must be true."

Just call him/her a bald faced liar and be done with them.

Just my .02

proud2BlibKansan

(96,793 posts)
13. Some of them - honestly - don't know how to copy and paste a link.
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:35 PM
Jul 2012

They'll post the name of the article or the author or the name of the website but NEVER a link. I am convinced they don't know how.

longship

(40,416 posts)
9. You cannot prove a negative
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:17 PM
Jul 2012

If he's making this allegation it is his obligation to provide reference to document his claim. The extent that he refuses is the extent to which his claims are bullshit.

Tell the guy that.

onenote

(42,763 posts)
10. Its based, inaccurately, on a letter that the EEOC issued in 2011
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:24 PM
Jul 2012

In 2011, the EEOC posted an informal opinion letter stating that requiring applicants to have a high school diploma may violate the ADA if it screens out individuals who cannot obtain a diploma because of a learning disability, unless the employer can demonstrate that the requirement is job-related and consistent with business necessity. A subsequent clarification letter was issued in February of this year.

See the following for links: http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/foia/letters/2011/ada_qualification_standards.html

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/high_school_ada.cfm

onenote

(42,763 posts)
17. Nah. But I have colleagues that specialize in employment law
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 08:54 PM
Jul 2012

A quick email and I was directed to the answer.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
11. Okay, I've got this one ...
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:31 PM
Jul 2012

See if you can follow it.

About 9 months ago, the EEOC issued an "Informal Discussion Letter" regarding the ADA-Reasonable Accommodations.

ADA: Qualification Standards; Disparate Impact

November 17, 2011

[ADDRESS]

Dear ____:

This is in response to your letter, dated October 9, 2009, and postmarked October 12, 2011, asking whether the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA), prohibits the State of Tennessee from requiring students with learning disabilities to take “Gateway tests” or “end-of-course assessments” in order to receive their full high school diplomas. We responded to the same inquiry when we received it in December of 2010, by referring you to the Department of Education. Please find the earlier response attached.

In the event that you found our earlier response incomplete or were seeking additional clarification, however, we are responding to a statement in your letter that raises a concern under Title I of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., which EEOC enforces. You correctly point out that some individuals cannot obtain a high school diploma, and therefore cannot obtain jobs requiring a high school diploma, because their learning disabilities caused them to perform inadequately on the end-of-course assessment.

Under the ADA, a qualification standard, test, or other selection criterion, such as a high school diploma requirement, that screens out an individual or a class of individuals on the basis of a disability must be job related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity. A qualification standard is job related and consistent with business necessity if it accurately measures the ability to perform the job’s essential functions (i.e. its fundamental duties). Even where a challenged qualification standard, test, or other selection criterion is job related and consistent with business necessity, if it screens out an individual on the basis of disability, an employer must also demonstrate that the standard or criterion cannot be met, and the job cannot be performed, with a reasonable accommodation. See 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(6); 29 C.F.R. §§ 1630.10, 1630.15(b) and (c); 29 C.F.R. pt. 1630, app §§ 1630.10, 1630.15(b) and (c).

Thus, if an employer adopts a high school diploma requirement for a job, and that requirement “screens out” an individual who is unable to graduate because of a learning disability that meets the ADA’s definition of “disability,” the employer may not apply the standard unless it can demonstrate that the diploma requirement is job related and consistent with business necessity. The employer will not be able to make this showing, for example, if the functions in question can easily be performed by someone who does not have a diploma.

Even if the diploma requirement is job related and consistent with business necessity, the employer may still have to determine whether a particular applicant whose learning disability prevents him from meeting it can perform the essential functions of the job, with or without a reasonable accommodation. It may do so, for example, by considering relevant work history and/or by allowing the applicant to demonstrate an ability to do the job’s essential functions during the application process. If the individual can perform the job’s essential functions, with or without a reasonable accommodation, despite the inability to meet the standard, the employer may not use the high school diploma requirement to exclude the applicant. However, the employer is not required to prefer the applicant with a learning disability over other applicants who are better qualified.
We hope this information is helpful. This letter is an informal discussion of the issues you raised and should not be considered an official opinion of the EEOC.

Sincerely,

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/foia/letters/2011/ada_qualification_standards.html




This document caused quite the ruckus, as legal consultants wrote alarmist marketing pieces, suggesting that the EEOC had just made it illegal to require a high school diploma.

But these consultants failed to include what the EEOC said in the letter, or the EEOC's specific response to the question.

Question: Have you just made it illegal for businesses to require a high school diploma?

Answer: No. Nothing in the letter prohibits employers from adopting a requirement that a job applicant have a high school diploma. However, an employer may have to allow someone who says that a disability has prevented him from obtaining a high school diploma to demonstrate qualification for the job in some other way.

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/high_school_ada.cfm



So in the histronic wingnut world, this informal discussion letter became law ... just like a panel of doctors studying the efficacy of specific medical procedures became "death panels", even though the ACA specifically indicates that the panels findings CANNOT be used to deny that specific treatment for specific patients.
In this advisory note, the EEOC

obamanut2012

(26,142 posts)
16. No!
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 06:44 PM
Jul 2012

The Labor Department doesn't have that kind of authority anyway, and what a ridiculous for anyone to do.

Ask him/her to prove it. It's a lie.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Obama's labor depar...