“…The “big joke” in State Government is there’s ‘no age, or work-place…. discrimination…’”

Image result for caricature of age discriminationEMPLOYMENT and AGE DISCRIMINATION: It’s against the law to practice “age discrimination” in the work place… especially in State Government. AGE DESCRIPINATION: The JOKE of the day.

The “big joke” in State Government is there’s “no age, or work-place…. discrimination.”

Fact: Age Discrimination and work-place discrimination is alive and well. State Government allows those who have “just-retired” to return to their old jobs, just as if they had not left their job; thus collecting their retirement, and in most cases, SSI, and now the new salary. The only requirement is that they have to be “away from their (old) job for 16 days, before returning. So, if one is “really lucky,” he may, even, be a military retiree, thus collecting 3 retirement checks and a current salary.

This “lucky person” could have been a “military retiree,” (retiring after 20 years), and collecting, say, $25,000.00, and then go to work for the State Government, and 22 years later (age 62)… retire from the State Government, and collect…say…another $25,000.00, and then return to his former job… just 16 days later…and collect that salary…say, at $65,000.00, and also, he is qualified to collect another $25,000.00 in SSI benefits. So, now, we have a guy who is collecting 3 retirements, plus his salary (for returning to his pre-retirement job)… and is now collecting $140,000.00 per year…. All perfectly legal…. But highly IMMORAL… I think. These figures could change substantially if one of those former jobs was with the “federal government,” adding even more retirement potential.

I don’t begrudge the “employee” for getting all of these “retirement benefits,” but I do think the State Government is discriminating “against” those who are without jobs, some even over 60 years of age (yet still very qualified, willing, and able), and those others who have been victims of the “economic collapse.”

Those jobs should be filled by those who have not worked for STATE GOVERNMENT previously. State Government should “require” the “just retiring employee” to fully retire… and not come back…period!!   The State, then, should give the job to someone who is currently un-employed, yet qualified.

How can our government provide as much as 3 retirements plus a current salary to an individual, while all along, having fully qualified individuals drawing unemployment, which is still “more of a drag” on the economy?

Matthew 23:1-39 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so practice and observe whatever they tell you—but not what they do. For they preach, but do not practice. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long,

Does it make a “particle bit of sense,” to give a job to a man collecting 3 retirements, while there is another, with “no job,” and collecting un-employment? Where is the justice?

…Blessings…cjlb…10/29/15  

About Charles Brooks

who is originally from Miami, Fla., moved to SC, holds two degrees from the University of SC. His business background is primarily in Real Estate Development (Motels, Hotel, Office Buildings, Restaurants, Residential) and Business Consulting. He currently is Managing Director of Brooks, Baker, Lehman & Kohlhepp - Investors in Real Estate and Mining, and has other business interests under the umbrella of Brooks Properties. FULL-TIME-MINISTRY: Fully engaged in spreading the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ, with an emphasis on the Business Community.

Subscribe

Subscribe to our website to receive updates.

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply