[Rhodes22-list] Reduce your CODB for personal monetary gains

Brad Haslett flybrad at gmail.com
Thu Jun 29 01:43:14 EDT 2006


Philip,

Government interferes with business?  You mean like this?

Brad

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


June 28, 2006 When Sexism Claims Are a Real Hoot*By* *John
Stossel*<http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/author/john_stossel/>

You've probably heard of Hooters -- the restaurant chain known for
attracting male customers by hiring waitresses who are well-endowed and
dressed to show it.

The firm now employs more than 30,000 people. Some would consider this a
success story, but our government didn't. Not because Hooters is using sex
to sell -- but because its waitresses are -- get ready -- women!

"Discrimination!" cried the federal government's Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

The business of Hooters is food, said the government, and "no physical trait
unique to women is required to serve food." EEOC lawyers demanded Hooters
produce all its hiring data, and then grilled Hooters for four years. Mike
McNeil, Hooters' vice president of marketing, told "20/20" the EEOC
bureaucrats demanded to look at reams of paperwork. "Employee manuals,
training manuals, marketing manuals -- virtually everything that's involved
in how we run our business . . . "

The EEOC then issued a set of demands. First, it defined a class of
disappointed males who had not been hired by the company. The EEOC said,
according to McNeil: "We want you to establish a $22-million fund for this
mythical 'class' of dissuaded male applicants. We want you to conduct
sensitivity training studies to teach all of your employees to be more
sensitive to the needs of men."

I suspect Hooters' customers are mostly men who think the firm is quite
sensitive to their needs, thank you -- and that there would indeed be a
class of disappointed males if the government insisted men do the jobs of
Hooters girls.

Typically, companies assaulted by EEOC lawyers just pay up to avoid ruinous
legal fees, but Hooters fought back, cleverly, not just in court, but in the
court of public opinion. Hooters waitresses marched on Washington, chanting,
"Save our jobs." A burly Hooters manager dressed as a Hooters waitress posed
for cameras, beard and all, demonstrating what a "Hooters Guy" might look
like.

That was a hoot, and it may have worked. Lawyers representing male
applicants accepted an out-of-court settlement of $3.75 million, a fraction
of the $22 million that had been demanded. The EEOC dropped its demands for
sensitivity training; Hooters agreed to create more jobs like busboys and
managers, which didn't have to be performed by women.

Sears found itself in the EEOC's cross hairs because more men than women
held jobs selling things like lawn mowers and appliances. The disparate
numbers themselves were proof, said the government, that Sears discriminated
against women.

Sears denied discriminatiing: "We asked women to do those jobs. It's just
that few women want to sell things like lawn mowers."

Is that too politically incorrect a concept for government lawyers to get?
Men and women do have different interests. Go to any Wal-Mart and you'll see
women looking at clothes, men in the hardware department. There are
exceptions, of course, but the sexes do tend to have different interests.

More men selling lawn mowers and more women selling cosmetics does not imply
evil discrimination that requires armies of lawyers from the State. Show me
women who want to sell lawn mowers but are being required to sell cosmetics
instead -- or men who want to sell cosmetics but have to sell lawn mowers --
and we have grounds for discussion. But if the women choose the cosmetics
counter, any discrimination is their own.

The EEOC was unable to produce any women who would complain that they'd been
discriminated against, so Sears finally won the suit. The $20 million the
litigation cost was passed on to us customers.

Have these and other EEOC excesses embarrassed the government into shrinking
the EEOC? Of course not. It now has 2,400 employees, and spent $326.8
million in 2005 -- millions more than the year before. Government keeps
growing, and as it grows, it feeds on our money, erodes our freedom and
defies our common sense.



On 6/28/06, 3drecon at comcast.net <3drecon at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> As you businessmen know, a major part of the cost of doing business is the
> interference of government in the contract between the employer and
> employee.  Other than necessary safety rules, government should stay out of
> that contract.  They drive up prices, drive businesses out of states or the
> country as a whole and gum up the system.  Unions lobbied the feds for years
> for "benefits".  Now that most of those benefits are laws, the people don't
> want to join unions and pay them for benefits that are mandated by law, and
> the unions whine (I am a 28 year union member so I am not anti-union).
> Maryland is currently doing their best to destroy Walmart.  The idea that
> a company has to "give back" to the community is nonsense.  You pay for a
> product or service (like a Rhodes 22) and you get the product or
> service.  The only other obligations the company should have is to pay the
> prevailing wage (which is whatever the market will bear) pay their taxes and
> clean up after themselves (enter the government).  If there are benefits to
> be had, then it should be a part of the collective bargaining process or the
> competition for labor.  Some regulation is necessary to prevent
> environmental dumping, inherently unsafe products (this has been carried too
> far too) or products that do what they are supposed to do etc.  Otherwise
> the government needs to step out and do what the Constitution allows.  That
> goes for the States too.  However; if the feds follow the Constitution and
> don't interfere, the States can do what they want.  If they go too far, the
> citizens can vote their will t
> here o
> r as one President put it, "vote with their feet".
>
> Philip
>
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "stan" <stan at rhodes22.com>
>
> > everyone ( and congress people ) please listen to Brad and even Bill on
> > this one - stan/gbi
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brad Haslett"
> > To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 10:03 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Reduce your CODB for personal monetary
> gains
> >
> >
> > > Warren,
> > >
> > > The issue for us is not cheap labor, it is labor period. They are
> there
> > > and
> > > willing to work. You don't see locals lined up at Home Depot at five
> am
> > > looking for a job. We pay the prevailing labor wage, now $15 per hour,
> > > because they demand it. My brother, who is the real brains of the
> > > company,
> > > is used to working in a union environment. In Illinois, unskilled
> labor
> > > gets $30 per hour plus benefits. No problem, you just build the cost
> into
> > > the job and pass it on to the customer. No doubt there are some
> abusing
> > > employers out there, but any one with half a brain for business treats
> > > their
> > > employees well, legal or not. We operate on the Louis Haslett
> principle
> > > (my
> > > father), don't ask a man to do something you wouldn't do yourself. We
> > > just
> > > hired another full time local and are always on the lookout for more
> who
> > > show on time, sober, and are not looking for a workmans comp injury.
> You
> > > wouldn't believe how difficult finding a good empoyee can be.
> > >
> > > Brad
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 6/28/06, Bill Effros wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Your point is well taken, Warren.
> > >>
> > >> The country votes with its credit cards, and it is taking its credit
> > >> cards to Wal-Mart despite the fact that Wal-Mart is killing all the
> > >> American businesses by hiring illegals, importing everything, and
> > >> teaching its employees how to free load their medical bills off the
> > >> taxpayer supported system.
> > >>
> > >> Everyone likes to talk a good game, but when it comes to their own
> > >> money, other people's jobs are just another cost of doing business.
> > >>
> > >> Bill Effros
> > >>
> > >> Foy, Warren wrote:
> > >> > CODB "cost of doing business"
> > >> >
> > >> > Note Subject line change:
> > >> > Was "Reduce your federal income tax (political humor)"
> > >> >
> > >> > Brad wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > "It pisses me off every time I go to an ATM or call a phone tree
> and it
> > >> > asks
> > >> > whether I want English or Spanish."
> > >> >
> > >> > Amen Brad.
> > >> >
> > >> > However, your dream implies that you are willing to support such a
> > >> > necessity whether they are illegal or not. In your "dream", how did
> > >> > you
> > >> > pay your immigrant labor? Cash, Check, minimal cash with promises
> of
> > >> > additional work? If by check, do you expect them to use a bank or
> do
> > >> > you also own a check cashing service so that you can get your 20%
> back?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
> > >> > [mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org] On Behalf Of Brad
> Haslett
> > >> > Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 10:13 PM
> > >> > To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> > >> > Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Reduce your federal income tax
> (political
> > >> > humor)
> > >> >
> > >> > Bill,
> > >> >
> > >> > It pisses me off every time I go to an ATM or call a phone tree and
> it
> > >> > asks
> > >> > whether I want English or Spanish. That being said, most cabbies in
> > >> > Beijing
> > >> > are torqued over having to learn english for the 2008 Olympics.
> Here
> > >> > is
> > >> > an
> > >> > interesting perspective on native language. BTW, I've ordered the
> > >> > Spanish
> > >> > for Contractors CD for the boys on the beach.
> > >> >
> > >> > Brad
> > >> >
> > >> > ------------------
> > >> >
> > >> > __________________________________________________
> > >> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> __________________________________________________
> > >> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >>
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>


More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list