Qualified Liberal Candidates Need Not apply

The Justice Department, the Very department which is responsible for upholding the very laws of our land, recently had an internal audit.

The investigation which was performed by the department’s Inspector General and the ethics officer turned up systemic Hiring Practices which was reminiscent of the Elementary School play ground.  If You didn’t match their avant-garde, cliquish criteria, then you didn’t get to play with the cool kids.

The Report demonstrated how the  Bush Administration violated Federal Law with their very strange and bizarre hiring practices;  The Former Attorney General, and his small elitist band of Aids would decide which applicant would be hired,not based upon their Qualifications, but, instead the Hiring decision was determined upon very zealous and very conservative political criteria, for NON political jobs. 

They turned down Qualified Candidates and applicants, hiring the less qualified individual simply based upon their responses to their wacky questions which included-

• What is it about George Bush that makes you want to serve him?
• why are you a republican? 
  
• Tell us about your political philosophy.
  
• There are different groups of conservatives, by way of example: Social Conservative, Fiscal Conservative, Law & Order Republican.
  
• Aside from the President, give us an example of someone currently or recently in public service who you admire.  

The last question often took the form of asking the candidate to identify his or her most admired President, Supreme Court Justice, or legislator. Some candidates were asked to identify a person for all three categories.  This was believed to help determine the candidate’s political views.

These peculiar hiring decisions were made from the very moment they started reviewing resumes or recruiting for positions. They would “learn” about the applicant's political affiliation prior to contact.  

The employment form required applicants to note their political party affiliation, their voting address for 2000 and 2004, and the candidates were to submit a political AND personal resume, before their clearance could begin..  Now did I mention this was for NON political jobs?

They also googled candidates to determine their political and ideological affiliations with what they considered to be “Red-Flag” words such as -

 Sex, Clinton, Gay, Gun, Sex, abortion, liberal, arrested, bankrupt, abortion, pro-choice, Howard Dean, Karl Rove.

For you Google eficiandos … A note of caution - Don’t try this at work, as you can see what can happen in an investigation
A literal example of a search string  As per a Goodman in-house email -

““This is the lexis nexis search string that I use for AG appointments.” The string reads as follows: [First name of a candidate]! and pre/2 [last name of a candidate] w/7 bush or gore or republican! or democrat! or charg! or accus! or criticiz! or blam! or defend! or iran contra or clinton or spotted owl or florida recount or sex! Or controvers! or racis! or fraud! or investigat! or bankrupt! Or layoff! or downsiz! or PNTR or NAFTA or outsourc! or indict! or enron or kerry or iraq or wmd! or arrest! or intox! or fired or sex! or racis! or intox! or slur! or arrest! or fired or controvers! or abortion! or gay! or homosexual! or gun! Or firearm! “”

Also According to the DOJ Report

“Goodling kept the search string intact, but added terms when assessing candidates for certain positions, such as IJs, when she added the terms: “or immigrat! or immigrant! or asylum or DHS or ICE or border! or alien! or migrant! or criminal! or justice or judg!””

If you were Married to a Democrat, even though you were classified as an expert in your field, you just weren’t going to get to play in their playground.. sorry, you just didn’t fit in.

These hiring decisions were not only based upon New applicants, nah, they broke their own code of civil laws and would FIRE employees based upon their less than conservative remarks or comments, their political affiliations.  Not Republican.. sorry.. you gotta go.  But, if you Were Republican, conservative, you could be expected to quickly advance within the Clique.

When Asked, Monica Goodling who couldn’t remember if she made a habit of the process, did say that she managed to do this more than 50 times.  She also stated the following Quoted from the report from the department of justice   - 

“The Office of Legal Counsel had “provided  guidance . . . indicating that Immigration Judge appointments were not  subject to the civil service rules applicable to other career positions.” 

Goodling testified that she “assumed” that Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) member appointments were also not subject to civil service laws.” ---- OOOOPS..  Guess she was wrong huh? 

The Reality is -

“ It is the policy of the Department of Justice to seek to eliminate discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, political affiliation, age, or  physical or mental handicap in employment within the Department and to assure equal employment opportunity for all employees and applicants for employment (emphasis added).

“In addition to Department policies, the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) prohibits the Department from discriminating in hiring for career positions based on political affiliation. For example, the CSRA states that federal agencies must adopt hiring practices for career employees in which: selection and advancement should be determined solely on the basis of relative ability, knowledge, and skills, after fair and open competition which assures that all receive equal opportunity. ……..

“All employees and applicants for employment should receive fair and equitable treatment in all aspects of personnel management without regard to political affiliation, race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or handicapping condition, and with proper regard for their privacy and constitutional rights.”

Now, what I don’t get is that was she not a White House Liaison and The Senior Counsel to the Attorney General – so, shouldn’t She have Not known what their OWN laws were?  THE very laws that the DOJ should be Upholding.. the VERY Laws that they are prosecuting us simple, and less informed and even ignorant folks for?

Quite often I see online individuals discussing their hiring practices and often when publicly contested they would say that their General Counsel had approved their certain questionable behaviors – in fact just recently a peer and friend of mine had a very similar conversation about a company, which they assumed that the company more than likely knew what they were doing, because they were financially solvent, so obviously they had a boat load of lawyers reviewing their hiring practices..  

My response.. well.. at the time I used FedEx as an example, that I am sure that FedEx had a boatload of lawyers who “approved” their hiring practices which led to over 300 million Dollars in a misclassification charge.   The DOJ, well are they NOT a boat load of lawyers themselves, yet they “approved” this strange hiring behavior?  Guess they were not immune from the very laws they themselves uphold.

I wonder, do you think that the Government Department will be mandated to pay the stiff fine that a civilian company would have been forced to? Hmm..

For the report go to  http://media.npr.org/documents/2008/july/justice.pdf

----------------------------

ABOUT KAREN MATTONEN, CAC, CSP 

Karen is an experienced, successful recruiter who operates her own business and is actively involved in many industry organizations and activities. Her recruiting career began with Snelling Corporation. In 1998, after a successful tenure as a recruiter with Snelling, Karen struck out on her own, founding Advanced Career Solutions (ACS). ACS focuses on recruiting for the HVAC Industry. Karen has achieved accreditation as a California Accredited Consultant (CAC) through California Staffing Professionals. She has also gained her Certified Staffing Professional Certificate (CSP) through American Staffing Professionals. (www.americanstaffing.net)

She has a new and future-oriented vision of what recruiting can and should become: a profession we can be proud of for its ethical standing, professional conduct and ability to build great organizations. Her doing-well-by-doing-right philosophy is shaking up the status quo in an industry that needs to be shaken. She does this with conviction, leadership, and a distinctive voice that cries out for change.

Karen was a co-creator of the landmark webinar event – “EEOC Discrimination Debate.” This event featured senior members of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and staffing industry experts discussing and debating difficult issues about discrimination in today’s workplace environment. Company executives, hiring managers, recruiters, and human resource professionals from across the United States were invited to participate in the free Webinar and live panel discussion. Karen also served as one of the panelists on the discussion team in the March, 2006 event.

As co-host of the popular podcast “The Recruiters Lounge,”Karen discusses her frank opinions on the recruitment industry with her co-host, Jim Stroud.