, ,

Life outside of work is still work?

So, it’s technically illegal for an employer to discriminate in their hiring practices based on race, creed, ethnicity, religion, sexual preference, gender, age, etc.

Ever since the employers became savvy to social networking, there has been an ongoing debate about whether or not they can discriminate based on an applicant’s life outside of work. I’m not saying this is right, but I am wondering if there is some onus on the employee to practice what they preach?

For instance, should a cardiologist be allowed to smoke? Should an environmental planner be allowed to drive a hummer? Should a wellness coordinator be allowed to eat at McDonalds?

I know this is a slippery slope to start skiing down, but during these tough economic times, government needs the best of the best. Part of that (in my opinion) is having employees in the job who are passionate about what they do, at work and outside of work.

Please feel free to tell me if you think I’m crazy or too opinionated.

Leave a Comment

One Comment

Leave a Reply

Profile Photo Peter Sperry

I believe government employees should be competent, professional and alway give their best efforts on the in support of whatever administration happens to be in office at the time. It may be more than a bit unrealistic to expect government employees to always be passionate about administrative objectives off the job. Mayors, governors, presidents, councils, legislatures and Congress are all subjcet to sudden change of party and ideological control. Our nation decided long ago that government was best served by a corps of civil servents who remain on the job regardless of who is at the top. Our elected officials have a right to expect, and should demand, the best efforts of public employees when they are on the job. But not off the job. Our personal lives are our own and we have a right to live them in a way that reflects our values, not the whim of the electorate.