In this year's state of the union address, President Obama unveiled the American Jobs Act, a bill aimed at creating jobs through cutting payroll taxes to encourage small businesses to hire, modernizing schools and rebuilding roads and bridges across the country, keeping teachers, firefighters, and policemen in the workforce, and "expanding job opportunities for low-income youth and adults." The bill also happens to ban employment discrimination against the unemployed and give unemployed Americans the right to sue a company with a workforce of 15 or more employees if that company refuses to hire an unemployed worker because of his or her status. This proposal is already generating skepticism and opposition among Republicans in Congress, who argue that granting this right to the unemployed will lead to a jumble of lawsuits and will do nothing to lower the unemployment rate. I, myself, need to think about this proposal a little because I have slight doubts about it, but I am leaning in favor of it. Under the American Jobs Act, should unemployed Americans be given the right to sue companies for not hiring them?
Some points to cover would be whether the refusal of businesses to hire the unemployed is discrimination, assumptions about the abuse of such a right, the pros and cons for both the unemployed worker and business, and the short-term and long-term effects of this right.
The counterarguments of this topic would center on the added problems this proposal will, according to most critics, create: a mountain of lawsuits, an increase in the unemployment rate, more layoffs, the threat of revenge against big business, etc. I would refute these counterarguments by affirming that most of these critics are either affiliated with the opposition party or they are financially better off than the majority of Americans, so they do not understand what it feels like to be unemployed for almost a year.
Research would include surveys that show whether Americans are in favor of this right and whether companies are more inclined to hire an unemployed worker if this law were passed. Additionally, I would research articles written by prominent economists who can elaborate on businesses' reasons for not hiring the unemployed. After researching this topic, I hope to discover whether this law will indeed push businesses to hire again.
The three credible sources that will support my argument for giving unemployed workers the right to sue businesses who do not hire them are a book titled Philosophy and the Problems of Work: a reader, a money.cnn.com article called "Looking for Work? Unemployed Need not Apply", and nelp.org (National Employment Law Project) briefing paper about employment discrimination against the jobless. Altogether, these sources contain insight on whether people should have the right to work, possible reasons for companies to openly deny unemployed workers a job upfront, and surveys detailing people's attitude toward this trend among companies.
This issue is very current, and needs to be evaluated. On the one hand, I sympathize with unemployed Americans who are not even being considered as potential employees. They are trapped in this vicious cycle, and for now, the only solution that can benefit them is to ban employment discrimination against the unemployed, which I completely support; however, I am not sure suing a company for not hiring the unemployed will really solve anything except grant temporary money to those denied employment.
Works Cited
"Fact Sheet: the American Jobs Act." www.whitehouse.gov. The White House, 08 Sept 2011. Web. 29 Sept 2011.
Shirley,
ReplyDeleteThis is a great possible topic--one that I would say would be much more interesting (and consequential) than the ideas you had about reality television. Not that these other arguments were not important and interesting, but this would allow you to engage specifically with economic and political issues, which you are clearly interested in (given our discussion of Warren Buffet, etc.).
I like that you point to a specific question that you want to answer and consider the tension that this piece of the bill has. I also like how you are ambivalent about this question. You are opening yourself up to the question whether than coming up with a yes or no question.
I am continually impressed with your thinking and work. Great job.
This topic is fairly new so there are not many sources that address the issue of granting the unemployed the right to sue companies that do not hire them. I am still indecisive about what topic I would like my research paper to focus on, and on top of that, I thought of more topics I can write about: whether Alabama's recently enacted immigration law is unconstitutional or at least, extreme; does banning soda and sugary drinks in schools really help curb childhood obesity; given the concern over the funding for social security, should wealthy elders continue to receive social security; and will raising the retirement age really bring in more money for social security?
ReplyDeleteall those are also viable topics and issues. Some of your peers are already doing work on childhood obesity, so perhaps you can choose a different research question. Th immigration law would be interesting and would involve looking at legal documents and interpreting constitutional law. The social security question is also a controversial one.
ReplyDelete