~ archived since 2018 ~

JAL ad discriminating against men who collectively have compulsory national service (male utility) spurs outrage

wrez

December 27, 2014

12 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2014/12/jal-no-intention-to-discriminate-singapore-male-applicants/

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	JAL ad discriminating against men who collectively have compulsory national service (male utility) spurs outrage
Author	wrez
Upvotes	12
Comments	9
Date	December 27, 2014 2:48 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2qj81j/jal_ad_discriminating_against_men_who/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/jal-ad-discriminating-against-men-who-collectively.991675 https://theredarchive.com/post/991675

Comments

[–]Samurai007_ -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]wrez[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Celda 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ruskyandrei 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Celda 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Samurai007_ -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

No, ideally the national service would either be voluntary for men as well as women, or required for women the same as it is for men. That is where the focus should be to make a change, not on an employer needing to fill a position. Imagine you are an employer, you need to hire someone for a full-time job, and it's going to take hundreds of dollars (or more) to train the person, and probably a month to get them up to speed on what the job entails. Are you going to hire someone who you know must leave for 2 years in the military a month from now? Heck no, you can't wait 2 years until he gets back, you need someone now, so you'll need to hire someone else to do the job. Even if JAL removes the wording from the ad, I'm sure the policy will remain the same, because it'd be stupid to spend time and money training someone who will be required by law to leave for 2 years.

As a counterbalance, I doubt they would also hire a woman who is 8 months pregnant for a job they need filled full-time right now.

[–]wrez[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Samurai007_ -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

JAL isn't talking about reserve obligations in the event of an emergency, it's talking about the 2 year conscription period. So what would your solution be, force a company to hire someone about to leave for 2 years? That's crazy.

Look, I have experienced something similar. I applied to teach English in Japan on the JET program, and the application process is very long, almost 9 months. You have several months between the time you find out you have been accepted and when you actually leave. Would it have been fair for me to demand that a company spend a bunch of time and money training me for some job knowing that I was leaving the country for 2 years in a couple months? No, of course not. I did part-time jobs until I left (and told my employer up front that I was leaving in July). When I got back, then I found a full-time job.

[–]wrez[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link