Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
Thanks Tree15Thanks

Thread: Many Trump Aides Are Too “Toxic” To Get Jobs

  1. #1
    Cat-tastic Babba's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    68,661
    Thanks
    50622

    From
    So. Md.

    Many Trump Aides Are Too “Toxic” To Get Jobs

    It looks like they hitched their wagon to the wrong administration. Sucks to be them.

    Trump administration officials looking to escape to the private sector are getting a rude awakening: No one wants to hire them.
    Companies and firms who used to recruit from presidential administrations and brag when they were successful in poaching an aide are making the calculation that the risks of bringing on a Trump administration official outweigh the rewards, according to interviews with 10 current and former administration officials, top recruiters, and lobbyists who did not want to be named to talk candidly. BuzzFeed News reached out to them after previously reportingduring an especially chaotic stretch for the Trump White House that some officials were trying to leave but finding their job prospects to be “pretty bleak.” That’s especially pronounced for more junior staff.

    The leadership at a prominent, bipartisan Washington public affairs firm went as far as to make an active decision not to hire from the Trump White House because of the "reputational risk" associated with it, a former White House official was recently told. The official asked BuzzFeed News not to disclose the name of the firm.


    In another case, a White House official said he was rejected out of the blue for a job after being given indications he would be hired and was explicitly told his affiliation with the Trump White House had been a problem for some at the company.
    The dark cloud of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe hanging over the administration has made those in the private sector wary of doing any hiring from Trump world.

    “There's a legal risk there," said another leading Washington consultant who specializes in placing government officials in the private sector.

    "There's a certain level of uncertainness around the toxicity. Generally, there aren't a ton of jobs waiting for those people.”

    Companies are also associating staffers, especially those who came from the campaign and don’t have much other experience, with anti-immigrant, anti–free trade views because of what the president has said and the policies he has enacted, three sources said.
    https://www.buzzfeed.com/tariniparti...nvK#.xt64Wz3qa

  2. #2
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28354

    From
    New Hampshire
    How many had real jobs prior? Most of them are already "has beens" or are wealthy. For the few who werent, I do wonder if legally they would have a case? They could cite job discrimination or something like that I would presume.

  3. #3
    Flibbertigibbet Wonderer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    26,280
    Thanks
    17550

    From
    Missouri
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    How many had real jobs prior? Most of them are already "has beens" or are wealthy. For the few who werent, I do wonder if legally they would have a case? They could cite job discrimination or something like that I would presume.
    There's no discrimination case based on "former employment." That's not a protected class situation (versus race, gender, etc.)
    Thanks from boontito and Ian Jeffrey

  4. #4
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28354

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    There's no discrimination case based on "former employment." That's not a protected class situation (versus race, gender, etc.)
    Couldnt they cite politics? I know around here, there was a company who told a prospective employee, they wouldnt hire him because he was an open supporter of Trump. It seems citing one as a "former employee" of a politician that could create issues.

  5. #5
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28354

    From
    New Hampshire

  6. #6
    Flibbertigibbet Wonderer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    26,280
    Thanks
    17550

    From
    Missouri
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Couldnt they cite politics? I know around here, there was a company who told a prospective employee, they wouldnt hire him because he was an open supporter of Trump. It seems citing one as a "former employee" of a politician that could create issues.
    "Politics" (or political beliefs) isn't/aren't a protected class, though. You can't compel a prospective employer to hire someone on the basis of their political beliefs (or resume.)
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

  7. #7
    Veteran Member Eve1's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    18,896
    Thanks
    12957

    From
    My own world
    The opposite could also be true. One General who was up for a job went in for an interview. When interviewed right after by a reporter they asked him if he would take a job in the administration and his response would lead me to give him a job for being very insightful. He said NO, it's a shit sandwich.

  8. #8
    Flibbertigibbet Wonderer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    26,280
    Thanks
    17550

    From
    Missouri
    That appears to go more to situations where a person is already employed and whether or not their political activity is protected such that termination would = improper retaliation. As the first sentence points out: "Political speech and activity, especially in private sector employment, is not well protected by anti-retaliation laws."
    Thanks from bajisima

  9. #9
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28354

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    "Politics" (or political beliefs) isn't/aren't a protected class, though. You can't compel a prospective employer to hire someone on the basis of their political beliefs (or resume.)
    True but I certainly would hate for precedent to be set for ones political affiliations. Particularly these days where people announce it on Facebook or Twitter.

  10. #10
    Flibbertigibbet Wonderer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    26,280
    Thanks
    17550

    From
    Missouri
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    True but I certainly would hate for precedent to be set for ones political affiliations. Particularly these days where people announce it on Facebook or Twitter.
    Right - but think of it the other way around: Would you want prospective employers to be compelled to hire people based on their politics?
    Thanks from bajisima, Ian Jeffrey and HenryPorter

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Trump aides are ‘at their wits’ end’
    By HayJenn in forum Current Events
    Replies: 168
    Last Post: 26th March 2018, 09:00 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 20th January 2018, 11:47 AM
  3. Trump's aides don't want to admit the President is golfing
    By boontito in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 20th February 2017, 07:03 PM
  4. Trump's DOSSIERS on REPORTERS according one of his top aides!!
    By cpicturetaker12 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 14th February 2017, 04:54 AM
  5. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12th February 2017, 04:26 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed