Bureaucrats like enforcing equality because they like wielding power, not because they care about a just society.
The fact that we have people working for the Federal government, looking for malcontents, to justifying bullying and vandalizing businesses, is a disgusting outrage. Enforcing equality is a scam.
The newest instance of social justice, fighting discrimination, enforcing equality, or whatever, comes to us from the Federal Court in Eugene, Oregon, regarding nefarious practices in Utah. The Oregonian reports, “Ruby Tuesday restaurants discriminate against male employees, Eugene lawsuit alleges.”
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a federal lawsuit in Eugene this week that accuses the Ruby Tuesday restaurant chain of unlawfully discriminating against its male bartenders and servers by hiring only women for summer positions at its Park City, Utah, location.
The lawsuit seeks an injunction that would prevent Ruby Tuesday from depriving men of employment opportunities based on their sex; an order forcing the company to eradicate its wrongful employment practices; and to pay losses suffered by two male workers denied jobs in the summer of 2013.
Ruby Tuesday advertised temporary positions at the Park City restaurant that summer, but the chain showed explicit and exclusive preference for female applicants, and did not hire men based on their gender, the EEOC alleges.
But the Oregonian doesn’t tell us enough to have any idea what is going on. Newser.com digs up the explanation: The job included housing. Ruby Tuesday’s didn’t want to bear the expense of coed housing so they only hired one sex (allegedly).
And this is a crime?
Newser falls all over itself claiming that this lawsuit will “help women.” That is completely unbelievable. Women have a better track record than men in terms of crime and other issues that arise in day-to-day life. I don’t blame any company, when housing employees, for preferring single women to single men. Naturally, those who favor the lawsuit are now patronizingly presenting themselves as the protectors’ of women’s virtue: “jobs constructed as being for women pay less, have fewer promotional opportunities, and often, part of job is to be sexually available to male clients.” Ruby Tuesday is a brothel? Seriously? They might as well claim that all companies doing female-only hiring are really engaged in sex-trafficking.
Obviously this lawsuit attempts to deprive women of their marginal advantage in a specific labor market and decrease the number of potential jobs that they are advantageously suited for. This is an attack on female workers. Nothing more.
There are all kinds of sexual harassment lawsuits waiting to happen the moment the company takes upon itself the responsibility of offering co-ed housing. Any possible sexual harassment allegation would be eagerly pounced upon by the same group of liberal parasites that are now sinking their fangs into Ruby Tuesday for daring to have sex-specific housing. No wonder they didn’t want to hire both sexes!
The criminal discrimination in this case is the persecution suffered by a business merely trying to offer services in the most efficient (and thus cheapest) way possible. Customers want to buy food and drink, not pay for unnecessary co-ed housing and the necessary policing and liability insurance that would go along with it.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is an insane offense to the rule of law. It should be abolished. It is insufferable that taxpayers have to pay for these bullies to torment them whenever employers try to make efficient decisions. Obviously, men and women are not equal (or identical) in all aspects of labor. Employers will prefer one or the other for some jobs. Those who do so for irrational reasons will lose market share to the companies that do a better job—because in cases where men and women really are equal a company that eliminates one part of the labor pool will lose business to the more efficient company.
If enforcing equality is what you want, then you should make the government pay just as much attention to customers. From now on all your receipts from fast food, from convenience shopping, etc, need to be audited by a new cadre of government bureaucrats supported by more of your tax dollars. They should be able to fine you for “discriminating” by giving preference to businesses owned by men, women, or various races. You should be required to makes sure all your shopping and dining treats all groups equally.
Enforcing equality is tyranny and vandalism of the economy. Employers should not have to prove to a Federal Court that their decisions are correct. No one is obligated to hire anyone else any more than you are obligated to buy from anyone you don’t want to, no matter what is the basis of your choice.
I’ll leave you with some food for thought about enforcing equality. Why do you think no one has ever sued Popeye’s for employee discrimination?