An employer cannot retaliate if you're running for office or have whatever political beliefs you may have. This is from the California Labor Code, but if I remember correctly, every State has this protection in place:

> Labor Code section 1101 prohibits an employer from preventing employees from engaging or participating in politics or preventing employees from becoming candidates for public office.

Sure but if you never hire them then you don't have to worry about it.

Yes of course, this is also how people get around ageism (you're simply "not a good fit"). All in all, it still doesn't make it right.

> All in all, it still doesn't make it right.

Sure it does. It may suck from a perspective of a candidate, but it’s a fair business position to value cohesion in a team.

>>Sure it does.

I can't comment on other jurisdictions, but the United States has a section of legislation called the Civil Rights Act Title VII[1] codifying that discrimination on the basis of a variety of factors (age included) is actually not (legally) right.

I think this is hard to enforce in practice, but just to be clear -- it's not (technically) "right" to be ageist in one's hiring practices in the US.

[1] https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civil-rig...

We have similar anti-discriminatory rules in the various parts of eu. The answer is always: 'prove the discrimination'. Candidates can rarely afford to even consider bringing a case.

Of course. But I bet many are quietly influenced by something like this, especially smaller employers who don't want to lose an employee and have to rehire.

Safest never to make him an employee, then.

You didn't read far enough. My campaign has been terminated and will stay terminated.

I lost the motivation to continue.

I can appreciate that plans and motivations change, but I read that page about intent and the update at the bottom was about getting a letter from Romney. FYI, I'd found the campaign content from the Gab link, which didn't have the campaign-termination announcement.

"If I lose, I will run for Senate of the United States against Mitt Romney in 2024. I will not go away."

"And if I lose, I will then run for President of the United States in 2028 since that is the first year I will be eligible. I will not go away."

This might reflect poorly on you in the eyes of an employer wondering if you were distracted by political priorities, and/or not seeing it through? Could explain the job fortunes.

Oh, yes, I'd better post it to Gab.

Let's just say that there was an external reason why I lost motivation that I could tell a potential employer, and they would understand. I won't repeat it on HN though.

In reality, I know why I'm not getting a job. I'll not a good fit for sterile office work. And that's okay for both me and companies; their are right to avoid hiring me.

As long as you're not surprised by the dampening on your job prospects. I feel like there's a difference between not being a good fit, and not getting the opportunity to prove you're not a good fit. Some of your filter, as many are suggesting, is well before the interview process.

I'm mid-40s and have worked for myself since my late teens. I recently realised that I'm likely unemployable in a traditional office sense, and so will need to make everything work off my own back until retirement. Things are good now, but prospects and perceptions change quickly with age, depending on your field.