Controversial Topic - Opinions & Debate please!
Replies
-
I don't think anybody should be judged based on their weight for employment unless there weight would actually be an issue. If I was hiring a pilot, I would hire somebody who would fit in the chair over somebody who was extremely overweight.
Her qualifications are most likely what are holding her back, at least for the most part. I'm sure her weight also has something to do with it but it's probably not as big of a deal as she's making it out to be.
What your not thinking about is a person receiving benefits is on a very strict income, obviously. When you go to the grocery store and look around at prices (at least here in America) you will notice that the cheaper foods are the ones that are unhealthy. For example I personally am very careful when shopping. I check the calorie content on everything. Regular peanut butter here is about $3 a jar. The peanut butter I use is $7 a jar for the same amount because it's organic and 100 calories less per serving (2 table spoons). She has to make the benefits last for a certain amount of time. In order to do that she has to stretch the money. Now, I have a question for you. If you were in her situation say had 300 a month in benefits for food would you buy healthy and starve 2 weeks out of the month or stretch the money and try to make it so you can eat for those 30 days?
No, I'd eat decently by making $300 last the whole month by not eating twice what a person needs to consume. Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe we are giving them too damned much money? My wife and I both eat off of $350 per month now that I am off of my strict keto diet. It's not WHAT they are eating, it's how damned much of it they are eating.0 -
IMO this is an none issue, this single case. 12 in 5 years is a joke.
Fatter people are not lazy, SHE is lazy. thats once every 6 months she applied for a job? If I was unemployed I'd be applying for jobs almost daily.
She didn't only apply for 12 jobs, she only had 12 interviews. Now, I agree that in 5 years that seems low, but I do know people that applied for 50/60 jobs for every 2/3 interviews they got while unemployed.
So of course, we can deduce that she didn't get more interviews because of her weight. I am pretty sure the receptionists who took her applications made sure to write 'fatty' at the top of it, so the bossman would know to not call her.
I'm not putting words in your mouth, by any means. I am just trying to follow the logic of this QQ bull****, and it just gets more ridiculous by the minute.
You can deduce anything you'd like, I offered no guess about why she wasn't hired or wasn't invited for other interviews. I simply pointed out that 12 interviews does not equal 12 applications as I know very few people (of any weight) that get called to interview for every job they apply for. Her minimal qualifications are probably what's holding her back and keeping her from getting more interviews, but knowing how many interviews she has had in no way indicates how many jobs she's applied for. That was the ONLY point I was making and anything else you chose to infer, was indeed putting words in my mouth - or certainly implying incorrect meaning to what little I did say.0 -
My opinion is this:
How when she must have other expenses does she have enough money living on benefits to remain large, after expenses most people who are earning barely enough money to buy food let alone someone on a low income like that? I agree that prejudice is wrong but I lost weight to do my job better and I am a much better employee now that I am fitter.
I don't believe it takes a lot of money to eat fatty food. Greasy food is cheaper and requires less energy to cook.0 -
People are always having pity parties and making up excuses why they can't do things. This doesn't sound any different to me. There are plenty of people who are successful and fat.0
-
For me it's the 12 interviews in 5 years that gets me.0
-
I don't think anybody should be judged based on their weight for employment unless there weight would actually be an issue. If I was hiring a pilot, I would hire somebody who would fit in the chair over somebody who was extremely overweight.
Her qualifications are most likely what are holding her back, at least for the most part. I'm sure her weight also has something to do with it but it's probably not as big of a deal as she's making it out to be.
What your not thinking about is a person receiving benefits is on a very strict income, obviously. When you go to the grocery store and look around at prices (at least here in America) you will notice that the cheaper foods are the ones that are unhealthy. For example I personally am very careful when shopping. I check the calorie content on everything. Regular peanut butter here is about $3 a jar. The peanut butter I use is $7 a jar for the same amount because it's organic and 100 calories less per serving (2 table spoons). She has to make the benefits last for a certain amount of time. In order to do that she has to stretch the money. Now, I have a question for you. If you were in her situation say had 300 a month in benefits for food would you buy healthy and starve 2 weeks out of the month or stretch the money and try to make it so you can eat for those 30 days?
No, I'd eat decently by making $300 last the whole month by not eating twice what a person needs to consume. Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe we are giving them too damned much money? My wife and I both eat off of $350 per month now that I am off of my strict keto diet. It's not WHAT they are eating, it's how damned much of it they are eating.
You also have to remember we are not getting the entire store about this woman. I'm responding to the information that I have. Does she have kids? Is she married? Does she live alone? We don't know her amount of benefits or the number of people the benefits are supposed to cover.0 -
You can deduce anything you'd like, I offered no guess about why she wasn't hired or wasn't invited for other interviews. I simply pointed out that 12 interviews does not equal 12 applications as I know very few people (of any weight) that get called to interview for every job they apply for. Her minimal qualifications are probably what's holding her back and keeping her from getting more interviews, but knowing how many interviews she has had in no way indicates how many jobs she's applied for. That was the ONLY point I was making and anything else you chose to infer, was indeed putting words in my mouth - or certainly implying incorrect meaning to what little I did say.
My response was less aimed at what you said than inspired by it. What I was getting at was that they are trying to make everything about this hinge on the fact that she's fat. It's pathetic.0 -
My boss once hired a woman just BECAUSE she was fat; fatter than the boss is. The boss wanted to feel smaller than somebody I guess. The lady even got bad referrences. It was a year of hell before we got rid of her.0
-
Since the CEO specifically stated that she would not hire the girl because of her weight, I think it's pretty obvious that this was an actual reason. I don't know about the UK, but in the United States this kind of discrimination is illegal.
To censure someone for their weight alone is a weird kind of depravity that we should not deign to engage in.0 -
ETA: I know people hate it when I point out the fact that poor people still like to have **** like iPhones and the like, but it really does show how screwed up their priorities are. So, they'd rather fuel their bodies like crap, than to deviate funds away from 'toys'? Seriously? **** them.
I have also seen people driving $50K plus vehicles that have high octane gas in the tank no doubt, waiting in line to buy fast food, which IMO the cheapest fuel you could use for your body, you know, the machine you are tied to for life. That boggles my mind.0 -
Overweight people cost more to employ because of insurance. Its just a fact. Their risks are higher and it makes the premiums higher. This is the way the medical world is going, employers are pushing people to be accountable for their own risk factors.
waitwaitwait...wait. "Personal accountability?" You mean I should take responsibility for myself? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard!!!!!111!!one!0 -
bump0
-
Since the CEO specifically stated that she would not hire the girl because of her weight, I think it's pretty obvious that this was an actual reason. I don't know about the UK, but in the United States this kind of discrimination is illegal.
To censure someone for their weight alone is a weird kind of depravity that we should not deign to engage in.
We've already been over this. You're wrong, just like the last person who said this was wrong. There is no provision in any law stating that you can't discriminate based on weight in the United States.0 -
You can deduce anything you'd like, I offered no guess about why she wasn't hired or wasn't invited for other interviews. I simply pointed out that 12 interviews does not equal 12 applications as I know very few people (of any weight) that get called to interview for every job they apply for. Her minimal qualifications are probably what's holding her back and keeping her from getting more interviews, but knowing how many interviews she has had in no way indicates how many jobs she's applied for. That was the ONLY point I was making and anything else you chose to infer, was indeed putting words in my mouth - or certainly implying incorrect meaning to what little I did say.
My response was less aimed at what you said than inspired by it. What I was getting at was that they are trying to make everything about this hinge on the fact that she's fat. It's pathetic.
Yes - but claiming she's clearly lazy (because she's fat?) and hasn't applied for enough jobs (which we don't know) is also making it about her weight, just in a different way.0 -
This morning on a British TV programme called 'This Morning' funily enough a lady who weighed 22 stone went onto the programme and complained that she could not get a job because employers thought she was too fat and how prejudice people are against fat people. There was another lady who was an high profile CEO and employer who was also thin who agreed that she wouldn't employ the larger lady because being fat gave the impression of unambition and laziness. In addition to this she stated that she would employ a thin person with the same qualifications over the larger girl because of this reason.
The larger lady whos name was Jay said she had gone for 12 interviews in 5 years and had no sucess as well as only having GCSE qualifications which are the bare minimum in qualification standards for someone to have in the UK. She is currently claiming benefits and not working.
Do you think that it is right for the employer to judge her in this way and not give her a job? Do you think it is not about her weight at all but her lack of qualifiications?
My opinion is this:
How when she must have other expenses does she have enough money living on benefits to remain large, after expenses most people who are earning barely enough money to buy food let alone someone on a low income like that? I agree that prejudice is wrong but I lost weight to do my job better and I am a much better employee now that I am fitter.
Is it whether you are fat or not or is it merely being fat represents being unhealthy and this hinders you in the work place?
THIS REALLY STRUCK A CHORD WITH ME AND I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR OTHERS OPINIONS, PLEASE RESPECT EACH OTHERS OPINIONS AND DO NOT BE MEAN TO PEOPLE. I DO NOT INTEND TO OFFEND ANYONE, THIS IS JUST A RESPECTFUL DEBATE TOPIC.
When I was unemployed and living on benefits, I found I lost weight because I couldn't afford to eat crap all the time. By no means was I healthy and I survived a lot of carbs so really I didn't make a dramatic difference to my body this way but I definitely lost weight from having to cut back on food.
I agree with the employer I would also hire someone slim over someone who is overweight. What the employer has said about impressions is correct and it's no different to what you wear to an interview, if you know how to apply make up (for women) and what your hair colour is (e.g. rainbow hair - not going to get you employed). That woman should make better use of her time while she is unemployed and start working out at home and changing her lifestyle rather than going on This Morning and complaining about how hard it is for her.
It's hard for everyone in England at the moment and if she is up against 5 people who are slimmer than her so therefore give off a better impression to their clients/colleagues and who appear to have more stamina (e.g. running around London in a pair of high heels, staying at the office until 8pm at night, skipping lunch, etc.) then she is obviously going to lose out on the job opportunity.
As bad as it sounds, weight does come into something like this and I don't entirely disagree that it shouldn't because it CAN be a reflection on the person's attitude towards everything. It's certainly an impression of their attitude towards themselves and their bodies.0 -
My opinion is this:
How when she must have other expenses does she have enough money living on benefits to remain large, after expenses most people who are earning barely enough money to buy food let alone someone on a low income like that? I agree that prejudice is wrong but I lost weight to do my job better and I am a much better employee now that I am fitter.
Is it whether you are fat or not or is it merely being fat represents being unhealthy and this hinders you in the work place?
Are you joking with me? Instead of focusing on the topic that you introduced, you are attacking people who live on benefits i.e. poor people? This is why regular people shouldn't have these debates and why people without public health degrees shouldn't be making public health policies or decisions (another reason why most of our politicians don't know what they are talking about)
In the field of public health, it is COMMON knowledge that poor people are more likely to be overweight or obese. In the United States, this also means that minorities like African Americans are more likely to be overweight or obese. I'm not going to go into the specifics of this, as you could have a whole semester on it in public health school, but that's the reality. The fact that she is or is not on benefits shouldn't be used against her. I hope that if you ever have a rough time in life, or go bankrupt because of a major health issue or lose your job or so on or so forth, you don't have self-hate because you might have to go on benefits. The welfare system is there for a reason (although it needs some major reform in the United States).
When it comes to your original issue of whether or not employers are right/justified/allowed to discriminate against fat people, I'll agree that this happens alot, but it really shouldn't. I mean, would you fire your skinny employee if she became fat during her time employed? Would you hire an employee with a clear face or one with a few pimples?
The reality is that employers make hiring decisions for a whole variety of reasons, most of which are illogical. A recent study also showed that women who wear a moderate amount of makeup are more likely to get hired than women who don't wear any makeup and women who wear too much makeup are the least likely to be hired. Light-skinned people are more likely to be hired than dark-skinned people. People with "weird" names (like me) are less likely to be hired than John, Jane, and Sarah. I've pretty much come to the conclusion that hiring is completely subjective and when the hiring people themselves become more diverse, that's when we'll start to see hiring that is more "fair". Or someone will sue and it'll go to the supreme court.
the woman in question has been on benefits for 5 years!!!!! thats a LOT of bad luck eh?
i was on benefits for 3 months, as a single mother when my children were toddlers. i had more money as my rent was paid for me, my council tax was paid for me - hell, if i'd wanted i could have had free childcare if i was feeling a bit overwhelmed.
you didn't get any of that back then if you were working (no tax credits then) but i did work as soon as i found a job. just because a system is all wrong, you don't need to abuse it.
all the bleeding hearts just keep these people stuck in the rut they're in.0 -
I'm over 300 lbs currently... so I can say this from a personal standpoint.. right or wrong, its just ignorant to think people dont discriminate againts overweight people. It happens... so deal with it how you will. I chose to lose my weight.0
-
To the OP.
I don't think it's right, but I think it's naive to pretend it doesn't happen. As a pretty big guy (I maxed out at about 320 lbs, down to 293 now and won't be stopping for another 60 lbs or so) I don't feel that it's directly hindered me, but it very well might be the case.0 -
Since the CEO specifically stated that she would not hire the girl because of her weight, I think it's pretty obvious that this was an actual reason. I don't know about the UK, but in the United States this kind of discrimination is illegal.
To censure someone for their weight alone is a weird kind of depravity that we should not deign to engage in.
We've already been over this. You're wrong, just like the last person who said this was wrong. There is no provision in any law stating that you can't discriminate based on weight in the United States.
http://ebn.benefitnews.com/news/morbid-obesity-protected-ADA-2726731-1.html
Morbid obesity has precedent for protection, and 308 lbs (22 stone, the woman in question) falls squarely into the morbidly obese category at almost any height.0 -
I think they like fat people in my profession (medical transcriptionist) because big butts stay glued to the chair better.
(kind of joking, but really - most transcriptionists I've worked with have been overweight, and I certainly am)0 -
http://ebn.benefitnews.com/news/morbid-obesity-protected-ADA-2726731-1.html
Morbid obesity has precedent for protection, and 308 lbs (22 stone, the woman in question) falls squarely into the morbidly obese category at almost any height.
600 lbs. is one thing (even if I don't agree with it). I think her case would get laughed out of court, to be perfectly honest. To me, anything anyone has done to themselves willfully should disqualify them for this kind of protection.0 -
I love how the majority of you are here either to lose weight because you yourself are overweight or you have lost a lot of weight and yet still feel the need to bash other overweight people. Time to do a little self reflecting I think...0
-
I love how the majority of you are here either to lose weight because you yourself are overweight or you have lost a lot of weight and yet still feel the need to bash other overweight people. Time to do a little self reflecting I think...
Yeah, I did reflect...on that time I decided to stop sucking at life. Perhaps if this lady had made that same decision some time ago, she wouldn't be facing this problem right now.0 -
I love how the majority of you are here either to lose weight because you yourself are overweight or you have lost a lot of weight and yet still feel the need to bash other overweight people. Time to do a little self reflecting I think...
Yeah, I did reflect...on that time I decided to stop sucking at life. Perhaps if this lady had made that same decision some time ago, she wouldn't be facing this problem right now.
Well do a little more reflecting and try to figure out why this topic pisses you off so much. She personally hasn't hit "rock bottom" and has decided to make the change and lose weight. Maybe she enjoys being overweight. You're no better than she is just because you decided to lose weight and she didn't. You may be healthier but that's about it. Your weight doesn't define who you are as a person.0 -
Since the CEO specifically stated that she would not hire the girl because of her weight, I think it's pretty obvious that this was an actual reason. I don't know about the UK, but in the United States this kind of discrimination is illegal.
To censure someone for their weight alone is a weird kind of depravity that we should not deign to engage in.
the CEO who was on the programme is a former contestant from ' the apprentice'. she is an absolute fanny and, i'd like to hope, not a good indication of what bosses are like in britain.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Also, to weave in the concept of poor people not eating well because they are wasting money on vats of pure lard is ridiculous. That has nothing to do with the issue and it's odd that you would tie it in.
I thought that too.0 -
Also, to weave in the concept of poor people not eating well because they are wasting money on vats of pure lard is ridiculous. That has nothing to do with the issue and it's odd that you would tie it in.
I don't think it relates to her getting a job either, but did want to throw my few cents in regarding her being on assistance and eating unhealthily.
I GET that it seems cheaper to just go out and buy mcdonalds....maybe? Maybe not. ($5 can buy a few cans of tuna fish, a loaf of bread, and some fruit.) Food stamps don't apply at Mcdonald's. They do, however, go VERY far in the produce section. Most expensive thing I buy is meat. I'm not saying it's across the board and everyone takes advantage of the system, but I know A LOT of people who get so much in food stamps that they sell them to people for half the value. AND get the most ridiculous foods to stock their pantry. They don't bother with the price of it either. They buy foods or snacks that I'VE never bought because they were too expensive.
Like I said, it's definitely not across the board but it's way too common. Just because someone is on assistance doesn't mean they are doing everything they can possibly do to stretch their dollar.0 -
http://ebn.benefitnews.com/news/morbid-obesity-protected-ADA-2726731-1.html
Morbid obesity has precedent for protection, and 308 lbs (22 stone, the woman in question) falls squarely into the morbidly obese category at almost any height.
600 lbs. is one thing (even if I don't agree with it). I think her case would get laughed out of court, to be perfectly honest. To me, anything anyone has done to themselves willfully should disqualify them for this kind of protection.
As far as employment goes, if someone is capable of doing the job well, we should act as humanitarians and not ration our approval to parrot discriminatory public opinions.
That said, morbidly obese is morbidly obese.0 -
Well do a little more reflecting and try to figure out why this topic pisses you off so much. She personally hasn't hit "rock bottom" and has decided to make the change and lose weight. Maybe she enjoys being overweight. You're no better than she is just because you decided to lose weight and she didn't. You may be healthier but that's about it. Your weight doesn't define who you are as a person.
No, but I'd say the fact that I am no longer a total blimp, when paired with the fact that I have gainful employment puts me a couple of steps over her. Yeah, had to go there on that one...0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions