⚠️ This post has been marked as offensive.
I agree.
When I had a job, some workers got fired for something they posted online (talked against boss).
Its a stupid reason to lose a job, tho job was crap anyway so maybe for them it was a blessing.
But finding job is super easy in my country. People just refuse to work because job itself is crap and anyone who works here only lives a worse life.
establish that the freedom of verbal speech takes precedence over the freedom of association speech
Why should it though? Should a Jewish boss have to keep working with someone who talks about how much they hate Jews the whole time they interact? You're basically forcing people to tolerate a hostile work environment.
That hypothetical Nazi worker (I'm not a Nazi) hates Jews, but it's merely talk.
And firing them is merely firing...seems to me as reasonable and non-harmful as talking.
Firing takes away their income (so they might starve)
Why is the employer required to keep paying them if they don't want to? I mean by this logic, everyone is obligated to hire as many people as they can.
The goal of a company should be to focus on profit margins
The goal of a company is whatever the owner wants it to be. Similar to the goal of an organization or any socially constructed entity. Why does it need to be profit margins?
if you lost your job, then what would you do?
Get another job. Even if that's not feasible, I don't see how anyone is obligated to employ people. Because if you apply that consistently, it just means everyone is obligated to hire everyone, or at least everyone they can afford to employ. Which is just silly.
Would you be fine with it if an employer decided to fire someone for being Jewish?
Prima facie, I think employers have a right to fire people for whatever reason they want. I only support laws against discrimination on utilitarian grounds, since discriminatory hiring could lead to large swaths of the population being unemployed because of illogical decision making. I would support the policies you're talking about if firing for political opinions was shown to be a major societal issue leading to widespread unemployment. However, it looks like it's happening on a very small scale right now compared to the entire workforce, not enough to justify violating the prima facie rights of employers. And if we're looking at effects on society, an incentive against being obnoxious about politics at the workplace might be a good thing.
Jews are rare.
It's not a matter of how rare the demographic is. If it's rare, less employees are affected, but less employers are also affected. The difference with being fired over political posts is that anyone can choose not to discuss politics at work or post controversial stuff online. So it can just work as a disincentive, not actually result in firing.
Also with a group like Jews, if there are a lot of discriminatory feelings toward them, it might be impossible to get a job. Whereas I don't think we're at that point yet with politics, but maybe at some point we will be.
Just like Jews can choose to post Torah verses.
Okay, but people who fire jews tend to fire everyone with that ethnicity, not based on their actions.
How much counts as, "a lot"? That's some vagueness that should be eliminated.
I don't know, you just have to estimate case by case whether a policy will help society. Making up a percentage is pretending you are more confident than you actually are.
Should that be acceptable?
No, firing based on ethnicity seems less fair since it will mean some people will have no chance to be hired no matter what they do.
How about just don't consider %?
I'm not really considering %. I'm mostly going off on intuition and the results we've seen in the past.
Being Jewish is not just an ideology, but a complex
ethnoreligious identity that includes religion, culture, ancestry, and community, and can be defined in different ways by individuals and various Jewish denominations. While Judaism is a religion, a person can be Jewish through birth or conversion without practicing the faith, as seen with the concept of halakha (Jewish law).
Well the way you used the term it's ambiguous. I'm inclined toward allowing hiring to be based on ideology. It makes sense for someone working at a Catholic film studio to have to be Catholic, or for someone working at a Jewish film studio to have to agree with the tenets of Judaism. Like if a company exists for the purpose of promoting an ideology, that makes sense. But if that was leading to widespread unemployment and significant negative effects on people's well-being, I would want strict guidelines about when it's allowed.