Republican bill stops funding to states issuing DL's to illegals

[JoeB131]

Europeans will buy their own products. Americans will not. They will buy the cheapest products available to them. So what you're talking about is getting rid of a free country, institute fascism where government oversees all businesses, and force companies to close down. How does that solve anything?

Yawn, why is it you always define "Freedom" as the ability of business owners to screw the rest of us.

Battered Housewife Republicans, everyone.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Europeans will buy their own products. Americans will not. They will buy the cheapest products available to them. So what you're talking about is getting rid of a free country, institute fascism where government oversees all businesses, and force companies to close down. How does that solve anything?

Yawn, why is it you always define "Freedom" as the ability of business owners to screw the rest of us.

Battered Housewife Republicans, everyone.

They are not screwing anybody. You and I have widget companies. Widgets are also made overseas for pennies on the dollar compared to the US. You are going to pay your employees the most money to make your widgets over me and your overseas competitors. How do you expect to sell them and stay in business at the same time?

 

[JoeB131]

Joe believes that people start companies and create jobs as a social obligation. Forget about you not being able to sell your product or services because you have to charge so much. Just sell one of your many yachts.

But I'd be willing to bet that if Joe ever had to get his transmission rebuilt, put an addition on his home, have major plumbing work done, he would get three estimates and choose the lowest priced one. After all, that's what employers do. They pay their workers the least amount of money necessary to get the job done, just like you, I, and Joe do every time WE hire somebody to do work for us.

Okay... here's the thing. I might go with the lowest price, but I make sure I am getting quality and service level. (Again, 20 years of experience in purchasing). Low price usually means low quality and service levels.

The thing is, why should the rest of us tolerate the greed of the one percent? It isn't Socialism that scares you, it's Democracy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Joe believes that people start companies and create jobs as a social obligation. Forget about you not being able to sell your product or services because you have to charge so much. Just sell one of your many yachts.

But I'd be willing to bet that if Joe ever had to get his transmission rebuilt, put an addition on his home, have major plumbing work done, he would get three estimates and choose the lowest priced one. After all, that's what employers do. They pay their workers the least amount of money necessary to get the job done, just like you, I, and Joe do every time WE hire somebody to do work for us.

Okay... here's the thing. I might go with the lowest price, but I make sure I am getting quality and service level. (Again, 20 years of experience in purchasing). Low price usually means low quality and service levels.

The thing is, why should the rest of us tolerate the greed of the one percent? It isn't Socialism that scares you, it's Democracy.

Democracy is a frighting thing. That's why I'm glad I was born in a Republic.

Lower price does not always equate to lower quality, especially as it pertains to employment. Lower quality of an employee might get him or her laid off. People that need the jobs will perform according to the requirements of their employer.

The value of an employee is what your employer can find somebody else to do the same job and the same quality of work. That's all you're worth, and that's all I'm worth.

Many years ago I attended electronics school. I was working seven days a week and going to school at night. After fatigue with a few months of that, I questioned my teacher what I could make once I obtained my FCC license? He told me about 16K a year. Unsatisfied with the answer, I asked him what I could make if I stayed in school for two years and got my associates degree? He told me 18K a year. Hell......I was making more than that at the job I had.

Electronics is very difficult; it's all math. So why would a person with such training make so little money? Because everybody and their mother wanted to be in electronics at the time.

It's like that in any field of work. If you sweep floors for a living, anybody can do that, and you are paid accordingly. If you learn a trade or gain a career in something, less people will have your qualifications, and a void in that market will allow you to make better money. If you go to college for an engineer, many less people have that qualification, and you will make more money. That's how your wage is calculated.

 

[JoeB131]

Lower price does not always equate to lower quality, especially as it pertains to employment. Lower quality of an employee might get him or her laid off. People that need the jobs will perform according to the requirements of their employer.

No, they won't. What the good employees do. They look under "resume writer", they find a guy like me, and they get a job that will pay them well.

I worked for a truly awful company in the 1990's, where the management had that kind of attitude. The average employee lasted about two months. I had people quit their first day.

Many years ago I attended electronics school. I was working seven days a week and going to school at night. After fatigue with a few months of that, I questioned my teacher what I could make once I obtained my FCC license? He told me about 16K a year. Unsatisfied with the answer, I asked him what I could make if I stayed in school for two years and got my associates degree? He told me 18K a year. Hell......I was making more than that at the job I had.

Electronics is very difficult; it's all math. So why would a person with such training make so little money? Because everybody and their mother wanted to be in electronics at the time.

According to Glassdoor, if you stuck with it, you'd be making $64K right now.

https://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Electronics-Salaries-E2332958.htm

Kind of better than if you actually, you know, collect welfare.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, they won't. What the good employees do. They look under "resume writer", they find a guy like me, and they get a job that will pay them well.

I worked for a truly awful company in the 1990's, where the management had that kind of attitude. The average employee lasted about two months. I had people quit their first day.

Apparently the employer conducted his business that way. Some companies would rather pay low and have that kind of turnaround than pay more and have employees stay longer. It depends on how easily replaceable an employee is for that kind of job. Usually those are very unskilled positions that anybody can do.

As far as resumes go, HR people are trained in resumes to sift through the bullshit you come up with. They understand you're going to glorify every thing a person did including his or her bathroom breaks. You're not fooling anybody.

According to Glassdoor, if you stuck with it, you'd be making $64K right now.

What is this supposed to tell me? It doesn't list salaries unless you sign up to get them, which I know you didn't do.

Electronics Technician Salaries in the United States

Starting Pay for Associate Degree in Electronics

In most cases, there are no jobs around in this field of work. The last three guys that installed or repaired my cable television system had associates degrees in electronics. There was no other work available for them but installing cable.

 

[miketx]

Republicans in the House and the Senate are introducing legislation that would block federal funds from states that allow illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses -- the latest move in an escalating fight over “sanctuary” laws.

The Stop Greenlighting Driver Licenses for Illegal Immigrants Act would block funds to sanctuary states -- which limit local cooperation with federal immigration authorities -- and those that give licenses to illegal immigrants. Specifically, it would halt Justice Department (DOJ) grants, in particular those awarded under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, which is a top source of federal criminal justice funding for states.

The bicameral legislation comes amid a growing fight over sanctuary legislation. The Trump administration has been attempting to highlight attention to the dangers of the policy and has been shining light on cases whereby illegal immigrants have killed Americans.

“The United States of America should be a sanctuary for law-abiding Americans, not criminal aliens,” Trump said at his State of the Union address last week. Read more:

Republicans introduce bill to pull funds from states that give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants

Of course this is common sense legislation, but as we all know, Democrats lack that gift. They would rather see American business people locked up behind bars because their claim is those employers attract illegals to our country, but making them comfortable by issuing drivers licenses so they can get drunk and kill Americans is not luring them in.

With the Democrat House, it stands no chance of passing. But if there is a turnover in leadership after next election, I do hope Republicans don't let this bill remain defeated as they did with Kate's Law never to bring it up again. We'll see.

Lol good luck with that, snowflakes

You people think you're powerful, but let me ask.

What exactly have you won lately?

 

[JoeB131]

Apparently the employer conducted his business that way. Some companies would rather pay low and have that kind of turnaround than pay more and have employees stay longer. It depends on how easily replaceable an employee is for that kind of job. Usually those are very unskilled positions that anybody can do.

You mean like driving a truck in a straight line. That was one of the positions we had to refill constantly. SNAP. Anyway, the way this employer conducted business was fucked up. They were out of business by 1997.

As far as resumes go, HR people are trained in resumes to sift through the bullshit you come up with. They understand you're going to glorify every thing a person did including his or her bathroom breaks. You're not fooling anybody.

Sorry, buddy, I have a whole wall of testimonials from customers that say otherwise.

The thing about HR people is most of them are kind of dopey. Do you know who often come to me with the worst resumes? That's right. HR People. They rely way too much on Applicant Tracking Software to screen resumes. (easily beatable by knowing which keywords are relevant.

The other trick is to use quantifiable numbers to "glorify" their career. "Sold lots of stuff" is dull... "Achieved a sales volume of $3.4MM" is impressive.

In most cases, there are no jobs around in this field of work. The last three guys that installed or repaired my cable television system had associates degrees in electronics. There was no other work available for them but installing cable.

Don't worry, Ray, you'll always have an excuse. Kind of hard to win a race if you never show up.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sorry, buddy, I have a whole wall of testimonials from customers that say otherwise.

The thing about HR people is most of them are kind of dopey. Do you know who often come to me with the worst resumes? That's right. HR People. They rely way too much on Applicant Tracking Software to screen resumes. (easily beatable by knowing which keywords are relevant.

The other trick is to use quantifiable numbers to "glorify" their career. "Sold lots of stuff" is dull... "Achieved a sales volume of $3.4MM" is impressive.

But when they check into it, that 3.4 might be the lowest sales the company ever had. Like I said, they check into this shit. As for people that got a job, it had nothing to do with a resume they could have typed out themselves. Employers are looking for attitude, attendance, longevity, experience, and earnings.

I worked for one employer that used to get thees so-called resumes. He always called the former employers and asked them this simple question "If I don't hire X today, and you had a position open in your company, would you hire him back?" If the answer was no, that resume went in the shredder.

Don't worry, Ray, you'll always have an excuse. Kind of hard to win a race if you never show up.

Excuse for what? I don't need any excuses. I was in the field, you weren't. Many cable guys are hired with no experience. You run a line from the telephone pole to the house, and run the line into the house.

 

[JoeB131]

But when they check into it, that 3.4 might be the lowest sales the company ever had. Like I said, they check into this shit. As for people that got a job, it had nothing to do with a resume they could have typed out themselves. Employers are looking for attitude, attendance, longevity, experience, and earnings.

You keep telling yourself that... but here's the thing.

When you call a former employer... here's what they'll tell you. Yes he worked here from these dates. They won't tell you ANY of that other shit. If they did, and it got back to the employee, it would be actionable.

Now, the main purpose of the resume is to GET YOU THE INTERVIEW. That's kind of it. They won't even look into that "other stuff" unless the resume demonstrates it.

Half the "resumes you write yourself" get thrown out because of one misspelled word before a computer ever sees it.

I worked for one employer that used to get thees so-called resumes. He always called the former employers and asked them this simple question "If I don't hire X today, and you had a position open in your company, would you hire him back?" If the answer was no, that resume went in the shredder.

First, most employers won't answer that question for legal reasons. Second, that's actually a dumb criteria. But then again, the company you worked for was a real bunch of bottom feeders who most people wouldn't have wanted to work for to start with. "No Health Insurance? Hard pass."

Excuse for what? I don't need any excuses. I was in the field, you weren't. Many cable guys are hired with no experience. You run a line from the telephone pole to the house, and run the line into the house.

You drive a truck from point a to point b. No experience needed.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You keep telling yourself that... but here's the thing.

When you call a former employer... here's what they'll tell you. Yes he worked here from these dates. They won't tell you ANY of that other shit. If they did, and it got back to the employee, it would be actionable.

Now, the main purpose of the resume is to GET YOU THE INTERVIEW. That's kind of it. They won't even look into that "other stuff" unless the resume demonstrates it.

Half the "resumes you write yourself" get thrown out because of one misspelled word before a computer ever sees it.

The only real thing that's actionable are opinions or revealing personal information. For instance, he was in the bathroom all the time, I believe he was just Fn off. Or, I know she fights with her husband a lot, so she was late all the time. Those are examples of actionable.

An employer can say, she was tardy 22 times in the last year she worked here. That's truth, and there is no action you can take on documented evidence.

First, most employers won't answer that question for legal reasons. Second, that's actually a dumb criteria. But then again, the company you worked for was a real bunch of bottom feeders who most people wouldn't have wanted to work for to start with. "No Health Insurance? Hard pass."

Well most of the employees there are long term like I was. Plus he had me replaced in two weeks which is very unusual given an economy like this. The guy that replaced me was our backup driver who drove a straight truck. He advanced to my position, and hired a friend of a current worker for the straight truck job.

As for the question, my former employer (not the last one I worked for) got a list of questions from his attorney. That was the one he favored the most. It's a yes or no question that nobody can sue you for answering. The answer indicates if there was friction between employer and employee without going into specifics that could be actionable.

You drive a truck from point a to point b. No experience needed.

Most won't hire anybody with no experience, but some will. However because of their high rates to insure you, it will be low pay until you do get enough experience for the insurance company to drop the rates. You would have to go over the road for a year or so, because nobody local would hire a driver with no experience.

You see, experience is everything. You can't go on the internet to learn how to drive a truck like you can with your job. It's hands on in all kinds of bad situations and weather conditions. Just driving straight? Correct, anybody can do that. But the challenge is taking corners in cities and not hit telephone poles or cross walk signals, manipulating a 60 foot vehicle through very narrow construction zones, backing a trailer into an inside unlit dock where you can't see shit without hitting something.

Some of these older buildings were designed for straight trucks before tractor-trailers were even thought of. It's your job (if possible) to get that trailer into such a small space. I've been in places where other drivers just looked at the situation, turned around, and went home. They wouldn't even try it.

 

[JoeB131]

The only real thing that's actionable are opinions or revealing personal information. For instance, he was in the bathroom all the time, I believe he was just Fn off. Or, I know she fights with her husband a lot, so she was late all the time. Those are examples of actionable.

An employer can say, she was tardy 22 times in the last year she worked here. That's truth, and there is no action you can take on documented evidence.

Uh, actually, no. Most employers will only confirm employment.

Well most of the employees there are long term like I was. Plus he had me replaced in two weeks which is very unusual given an economy like this. The guy that replaced me was our backup driver who drove a straight truck. He advanced to my position, and hired a friend of a current worker for the straight truck job.

As for the question, my former employer (not the last one I worked for) got a list of questions from his attorney. That was the one he favored the most. It's a yes or no question that nobody can sue you for answering. The answer indicates if there was friction between employer and employee without going into specifics that could be actionable.

Again, they might have gotten away with that shit 20 years ago.

There are no federal laws restricting what information an employer can - or cannot - disclose about former employees. And while most states have laws about what employers can legally disclose, and to whom, many do allow employers to share details about job performance, responsibilities, and professional conduct. Check your state labor department website for information on state labor laws that limit what employers can disclose about former employees.

That said, because of defamation laws (which is slander or libel) companies are usually careful about what information they provide to hiring managers confirming employment or checking references. What they say has to be the truth or the company can be subject to a lawsuit from the former employee. Legally, a former employer can say anything that is factual and accurate.

Concern about lawsuits is why many employers will only confirm dates of employment, your position, and salary.

You see, experience is everything. You can't go on the internet to learn how to drive a truck like you can with your job. It's hands on in all kinds of bad situations and weather conditions. Just driving straight? Correct, anybody can do that.

Dude, you just said you were replaced in two weeks. That's how dime a dozen you are. But you'll always have an excuse for why you are such a loser and will always have someone non-white to blame.

 

[WEATHER53]

80% of them don’t need drivers licenses. They walk, ride bikes or mopeds, take the train or bus
Ahh the joys of importing the third world

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Uh, actually, no. Most employers will only confirm employment.

No, they call it references for a reason. Hell, the detective services I use for potential renters can tell me what you had for dinner two weeks ago. They are very good, and can find employment status.

Again, they might have gotten away with that shit 20 years ago.

There are no federal laws restricting what information an employer can - or cannot - disclose about former employees. And while most states have laws about what employers can legally disclose, and to whom, many do allow employers to share details about job performance, responsibilities, and professional conduct. Check your state labor department website for information on state labor laws that limit what employers can disclose about former employees.

That said, because of defamation laws (which is slander or libel) companies are usually careful about what information they provide to hiring managers confirming employment or checking references. What they say has to be the truth or the company can be subject to a lawsuit from the former employee. Legally, a former employer can say anything that is factual and accurate.

Concern about lawsuits is why many employers will only confirm dates of employment, your position, and salary.

So what does any of that have to do with the question my former employer used to ask? It doesn't put anybody in a libelous situation.

Dude, you just said you were replaced in two weeks. That's how dime a dozen you are. But you'll always have an excuse for why you are such a loser and will always have someone non-white to blame.

No, I said our backup driver replaced me. The company hired somebody that replaced his former position. The reason my employer started doing it that way was because he had a hard time finding T/T drivers. He tried temporary services, but most of them were rookies that just got their license. They were also unreliable when things got busy.

Now when he needs a backup driver, one of our guys trains a straight truck driver to get his Class A. They have to sign a three year contract with the company, and when a T/T driver takes a day off or goes on vacation, the dispatcher gives the rookie easy stops to gain experience. We also have van drivers that have their CDL B, so if needed, they do the straight truck stops for the straight truck driver while he's filling in for one of us.

If things are slow, sometimes a backup T/T driver is not needed. I've taken a few days off, came back to work, and my truck untouched.

 

[JoeB131]

No, they call it references for a reason. Hell, the detective services I use for potential renters can tell me what you had for dinner two weeks ago. They are very good, and can find employment status.

Most HR departments don't use private detectives...

I'll tell you what they do. They call your references, all right, but the references are usually people you've recommended.

They call your last company, but your last company knows damned well that if they say anything, other than the basics, it's actionable. My former Office Manager at the Company that Cured me of Republican Stupidity told me as much. And, no this is a person who I have a great relationship with. She's been to my place in Wisconsin with her family, I've been to hers. I did resumes for her, her son and her husband.

And she straight up said it. They'll confirm that you worked there and the dates, and that's IT.

So what does any of that have to do with the question my former employer used to ask? It doesn't put anybody in a libelous situation.

Actually, it does.. you see, funny thing. Juries that hear these things are usually 12 working guys, not 12 business owners. That's why you don't want to get ANYWHERE NEAR A COURT with a former employee.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Most HR departments don't use private detectives...

I'll tell you what they do. They call your references, all right, but the references are usually people you've recommended.

They call your last company, but your last company knows damned well that if they say anything, other than the basics, it's actionable. My former Office Manager at the Company that Cured me of Republican Stupidity told me as much. And, no this is a person who I have a great relationship with. She's been to my place in Wisconsin with her family, I've been to hers. I did resumes for her, her son and her husband.

And she straight up said it. They'll confirm that you worked there and the dates, and that's IT.

I think one persons criteria doesn't make it a standard. Several employers I worked for had legal advisors guide their parameters for not only questions they have for former employers, but for their former employees as well.

When police officers arrive on a scene of a crime, there are usually different versions. The fist thing they do is separate all participants and witnesses. What they are looking for are matches within the accounts given to make a determination of who is telling the truth.

Employers do the same thing. They know the resumes are doctored up, and applications can be falsified as well. So when they do the interview, they look for consistencies between former employers and the applicant. If something seems amiss, it raises a red flag and they investigate further.

Actually, it does.. you see, funny thing. Juries that hear these things are usually 12 working guys, not 12 business owners. That's why you don't want to get ANYWHERE NEAR A COURT with a former employee.

It's actually the expense they don't want to deal with. In any case, the accused has the right to choose a judge or jury, not the accuser.

 

[JoeB131]

I think one persons criteria doesn't make it a standard. Several employers I worked for had legal advisors guide their parameters for not only questions they have for former employers, but for their former employees as well.

Yeah, okay, guy. Whatever. I do this for a living, thanks. You collect welfare.

Employers do the same thing. They know the resumes are doctored up, and applications can be falsified as well. So when they do the interview, they look for consistencies between former employers and the applicant. If something seems amiss, it raises a red flag and they investigate further.

No, they really don't... I hate to break this to you, but most employers just do the interviews and go with the person they liked best. They don't really do in depth investigations. A lot of them don't even hire directly, they go with staffing agencies and they send over someone they barely vetted.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, okay, guy. Whatever. I do this for a living, thanks. You collect welfare.

I don't collect anything right now. Not one dime.

No, they really don't... I hate to break this to you, but most employers just do the interviews and go with the person they liked best. They don't really do in depth investigations. A lot of them don't even hire directly, they go with staffing agencies and they send over someone they barely vetted.

Well that's news to me, because anytime I was interviewed, it was by the owner, the supervisor of the department I was applying for, or an HR person. An employer doesn't just go with who they like best. That would be like me selecting a tenant based only on how much I like them.

If you know what you're doing, you take all input available to you to make a determination. That's what I do. It's also why I pay investigative services to help me out in that endeavor. Most people check out, but there were several times when things didn't. Much like an employers concern, if I make a mistake in my choice, I might have a hell of a time getting rid of them, and it could prove costly at the same time.

 

[WEATHER53]

The increase of the supply for lawn care and maid services has been real
Noble work it is but as far as uplifting America(the actual intent of legal immigration ) ; not so much

 

[Jarlaxle]

I did break a rib about a month ago, but didn’t miss a day.

Horse shit.