eibesfeldt wrote:lawschoolperson wrote:Meh. Pregnant --> can't do the work. In many cases, not being able to do the work is a problem. Maybe it delayed decisions in this case, maybe it caused confusion which made the process less meritocratic and less fair. It's impossible for us to know...though on its face it certainly seems possible that the two changes at least caused delay.
But, independent of that, I think we should all recognize as true the more controversial point that any attribute that prevents a person from doing a required task is a problem if we need that person to do the required task. I think the only way to argue that some attribute of a person that prevents that person from doing a required task should not be considered in whether to hire the person to do the task is to say that there is some very compelling reason to accept the person's inability to do the task because, in doing so, we achieve some greater good (or prevent a wrong). Such a wrong could be a discriminatory society (i.e., we should hire the pregnant woman even though she'll do a worse job because, by not discriminating, we create a better society). But, it's a weighing. Not being able to do work is not irrelevant--the drawback of hiring a pregnant woman to defuse a nuclear bomb would outweigh the benefit of preventing a discriminatory society.
Ok everyone shut up because I just got my KBB1
KBB1 = KB( + Baby)1?