Is it reasonable to require singles to recruit female assistants?

Unreasonable.

Recently, when a woman in Dongguan applied for an administrative position in a company on a job search platform, she was told by HR that she only wanted to be single. The woman reported the company on the grounds of "pornographic and vulgar", and the position was subsequently removed from the shelves, and her account Also banned. In response, the company's boss responded that his company was legitimate and it was normal to require singles. The incident had an impact on the company and the whistleblower would be prosecuted.

Unsurprisingly, the "recruitment of female assistants who are required to be single" has been labeled as "employment discrimination". The lawyer interviewed in the news held this view - the report was made by the female applicant. rights, and the banning of accounts and delisting of jobs is done by the platform and has nothing to do with women. The company has no legal basis to sue job seekers.

Is the requirement to be single suspected of discrimination? This issue has different opinions. Just like everyone has different opinions on "whether being single is personal privacy", it is difficult to reach a consensus among the public. Whether it is discrimination or not depends first on how the law determines it. From the perspective of international practice, employment discrimination is generally related to race, gender, religious belief, etc. Our country's labor law also stipulates that workers shall not be discriminated against in employment because of their nationality, race, gender, or religious beliefs. Note that since "wait" is not used here, one understanding is that employment discrimination only involves these four dimensions, and single or not cannot be included without authorization to expand it.

On the other hand, the legal provisions cannot be exhausted. The key to determining whether there is discrimination or not is whether the conditions are required for the normal performance of the job. As for whether "single men" are more suitable for the position of female boss assistants than married people, there is no authoritative statement. What everyone relies on is a guess based on common sense. Since family, especially raising children, requires a lot of energy from married people, some people may be inclined to believe that single people are more suitable for assistant positions. In addition, whether the company is recruiting female assistants or male salespeople, all applicants are required to be single. It can be seen that there seems to be no discrimination against women. If it is true, it is also discrimination against married people.

In addition, it must be mentioned that the public has misunderstandings about discrimination. Most people think that discrimination means being treated unequally, so discrimination is bad. But in the field of economics, or marketing, discrimination has another meaning, which is differential treatment. For example, common price discrimination, different pricing, that is, price discrimination is conducive to the conclusion of a negotiated deal, and instead of doing any harm, it has benefits; another example is service discrimination, when taking children to restaurants, children are treated differently, and they can enjoy BB stools. This kind of "discrimination" is actually demand-oriented precision service.

Back to the topic of recruitment, the company reasonably lists conditions within the scope permitted by law. It is understandable that it is just to improve screening efficiency. If we follow this logic, the female boss of the company is recruiting single female assistants. This is just the company’s true idea, and there is no shame in saying it in capital letters. On the contrary, if they do not be honest and write it down in order to avoid turmoil, but follow it quietly in actual operations, it will only waste everyone's energy for no reason, both for the candidates and the company itself. It is an uneconomical choice.

In a nutshell, although we clearly oppose all employment discrimination, we are overly sensitive and indiscriminate in treating any difference as employment discrimination, which is also worthy of vigilance. Some reasonable requirements based on job needs should be distinguished from discrimination. In the management of employment discrimination, we should also pursue the unification of legal effects and social effects: in practice, recruiters and applicants who abide by the rules will They should be taken care of, and they should not be accidentally injured.