 |
|
|
|||||
The U.S. Supreme Court is poised on Thursday to consider Donald Trump’s attempt to broadly enforce his executive order to limit birthright citizenship, a move that would affect thousands of babies born each year as the Republican president seeks a major shift in how the U.S. Constitution has long been understood. The justices are scheduled to hear arguments on the administration’s emergency request to scale back injunctions issued by federal judges in Maryland, Washington and Massachusetts blocking Trump’s directive nationwide. The judges found Trump’s order likely violates citizenship language in the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment. The case is unusual in that the administration has used it to argue that federal judges lack the authority to issue nationwide, or “universal,” injunctions, and have asked the justices to rule that way and enforce Trump’s directive even without weighing its legal merits. Trump’s order was challenged by Democratic attorneys general from 22 states as well as individual pregnant immigrants and immigrant rights advocates. His administration is seeking to narrow the injunctions to apply only to the individual plaintiffs and the 22 states, if the justices find the states have the required legal standing to sue. That could allow the policy to take effect in the 28 states that did not sue, aside from any plaintiffs living in those states. Trump signed his order, a key part of his hardline approach toward immigration, on January 20, his first day back in office. It directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority, including three justices appointed by Trump during his first term as president. The plaintiffs argued that Trump’s directive violated the 14th Amendment, which long has been understood to confer citizenship on almost anyone born on U.S. soil. The 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause states that all “persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” The administration contends that the citizenship clause does not extend to immigrants in the country illegally or immigrants whose presence is lawful but temporary, such as university students or those on work visas. The Justice Department has argued that these people are not subject to the “political jurisdiction” of the United States because their primary allegiance is to foreign countries. Automatic birthright citizenship encourages illegal immigration and “birth tourism” by expectant mothers traveling the United States to give birth and secure citizenship for their children, the Justice Department said. Universal injunctions have become increasingly contentious and have been opposed in recent years by both Republican and Democratic administrations. Judges often have impeded Trump’s aggressive use of executive orders and other initiatives this year, sometimes employing universal injunctions. The plaintiffs and other critics have said Trump’s directive is the quintessential example of a case in which judges should retain the power to issue universal relief, even if that power is curtailed by the Supreme Court. The 14th Amendment overrode an infamous 1857 Supreme Court decision called Dred Scott v. Sandford that had denied citizenship to Black people and helped fuel the Civil War. An 1898 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a case called United States v. Wong Kim Ark long has been interpreted as guaranteeing that children born in the United States to non-citizen parents are entitled to American citizenship. Trump’s Justice Department has argued that the court’s ruling in that case was narrower, applying to children whose parents had a “permanent domicile and residence in the United States.” Andrew Chung, John Kruzel, Reuters
Category:
E-Commerce
While estimates of the percentage of neurodivergent people globally typically range from 1520%, new survey results from neurodiversity advocacy and support nonprofit Understood suggest that the true percentage of neurodivergent adults may be higher. For one, more people are being diagnosed with ADHD and autism and other conditions that fall under the umbrella of neurodivergence. But more people may also be self-identifying as neurodivergentespecially in younger generations. Deloittes 2023 Gen Z and Millennial Survey showed that 53% of Gen Z self-identify as neurodivergent. The people who identify or have symptoms of [neurodivergence], will far exceed the most conservative estimate of those who have been actually diagnosed, says Nathan Friedman, copresident and chief marketing officer of Understood. He suggests that barriers such as high psychiatry costs and the misdiagnosis of neurodivergent women might prevent individuals from pursuing (or acquiring) a formal diagnosis. In April, Understood conducted a weighted survey of over 2000 U.S. adults, 659 of whom identify as neurodivergent. Thirty-one percent of respondents had at least wondered if they were neurodivergent although only 11% had received an official diagnosis. Stigma around requesting accommodations In a recent ResumeGenius poll of 1000 hiring managers, 86% claim that disclosing neurodivergence in an application would have either a positive or neutral effect on their hiring decision. But Understoods research suggests that neurodivergent workers have real concerns. In the survey, 64% of employed U.S. adults agree that people speak about their neurodivergence at work more openly now, but 70% agree theres a stigma around asking for workplace accommodations. Thats a 10% increase from their results last year. Among those workers who have requested accommodations, only 56% received ones that actually improved their work experience. One in four got accommodations that werent helpful, one in five were outright denied, and nearly one in five later regretted asking. Asking for accommodations doesn’t necessarily mean you’re unable to perform or you’re unable to achieve the results of what’s expected, says Friedman. The accommodations that workers typically ask for are simple to implement, he says. Accommodations could be anything from a flexible work environment to changing desks . . . [These] are pretty simple things that can help somebody improve how they work, the output of their work, and their feeling about how they work. Despite this, 15% of respondents said they had lost a job, were demoted, or lost a job opportunity after asking for accommodations. Part of this increase in perceived stigma may be connected with the Trump administration’s attacks on DEI in the workplace. In fact, the survey results show that 64% of U.S. adults believe DEI program rollbacks will make it more difficult for people to access workplace accommodations. Difference right now is not seen as a good thingregardless of where you’re at, says Friedman. What can be done Reducing stigma and improving the efficacy of workplace accommodations starts with proper education about neurodivergence in the workplace. We hear so many stories about individuals who don’t have the right accommodations and are let go because they don’t have what’s needed to do their job, says Friedman. So providing the education, providing the pathway to get an accommodation, and delivering the accommodations are all required. This is especially crucial as Gen Z now outnumbers boomers in the workplace. Over 50% of Gen Z believes they are neurodivergent, says Friedman. If you’re a company of 10,000 people, that’s upwards of 5,000 people that you could get a better work product from. . . . So [offering accommodations] is a win for everyone.
Category:
E-Commerce
Youve made it past the recruiter and the first round of interviews. Now youre meeting with the hiring manager. They’ll likely ask you a series of behavioral questions to evaluate whether youre a good cultural fit for the team. They’ll also assess whether they believe you are up to the managerial and leadership challenges facing the role. Preparing for behavioral interviews can be nerve-wracking. The stakes are high, and its easy to feel overwhelmed by all the possible scenarios they could throw at you. I’ve spent over a dozen plus years of preparing folks for interviews and talking to people on the hiring side. As a result, Ive developed an approach to behavioral questions that will help you shine in the behavioral interview. Its all about ensuring that you start strong. The STAR framework and why it doesnt quite work Many people use the STAR framework to structure interview responses. This method helps candidates describe their experiences to illustrate desired competencies. Start with S the Situation they faced, T their Task, A what Action they took, and R the Result they achieved. Now, this framework does help you organize your thoughts and distill a story to illustrate your experience and competencies. Unfortunately, this approach fails rhetorically because it lacks a strong start. When you lead with situations or context before getting to the task, the interviewer has to wait too long for the payoff. You risk losing the interviewer before you get to the action and results. An interview is like any presentation, you have somewhere around 30 seconds to hook your audience. Starting strong means a clear, concise statement of value that captures what kind of leader or manager you are. It also provides the interviewer a blueprint of what to listen for in your response. How behavioral interviews work Behavioral interviews are based on the premise that past experience is a predictor of future performance. The questions are generally less about getting the right answer. It’s more about helping the interviewer understand your approach, how you think, how you relate to others, and your values. As one hiring manager told me, When a candidate explains how he or she thinks about solving a problem, I get a lot more insight into what it would be like to have them on my team than I do from them reciting the solution. In my view, the STAR formula focuses too much on the story and not enough on the meaning. To borrow language from Simon Sineks Golden Circle model for organizations, interview candidates who strictly adhere to the STAR approach focus too much on the what and not enough on the how or the why. When you start your answer by naming the principles or values that guided your action, you get to the heart of the matter quickly. You also cue the interviewer on what to listen for as the story unfolds. How to prepare for behavioral interviews The STAR method is a good start to help you distill the narratives that illustrate your experience and competence. But to ensure that you have a strong start for each STAR story. Reflect on the foundational values that guided your actions. That might be empathy, accountability, collaboration, customer focus, data-driven decision-making, fairness, relationships, trust, or transparency. Articulating these principles will help establish what kind of leader, manager, or contributor you are. Examples of strong answers Once you’ve identified a set of 58 principles or values, you can use them to frame almost any answer. For example: Behavioral question #1 Tell me about a time when you had to influence without authority. Influencing without authority was a key part of my role at ABC Company. There were three things I always tried to keep in mind: empathy for my cross-functional stakeholders, transparent communication, and relentless customer focus. On xyz project, as the product manager (situation) I needed to influence my engineering counterpart to commit to an aggressive timeline (task). I knew that her team was under a lot of pressure. I had a series of 1:1 conversations with her about the requirements. I made sure to listen with empathy so that I understood all her constraints (action). I also shared the potential customer impact of the feature. It turned out that her team had been expressing frustration about not feeling valued. So it was key that she could motivate her team to work on a more visible feature (action). We found some compromises and were able to land on a timeline that would be a stretch for her team but that she was excited about (result). Here are some other examples of strong starts: Behavioral question #2 What was a time when you failed? First, let me start by saying that in order for a goal to be meaningful, it needs to be beyond what youve done before, and so there is always a risk of falling short. The key is to communicate to stakeholders as soon as I know we are going to miss, take ownership of the failure, and use it as an opportunity for learning. An example of this is when I led a team in product marketing at xyz . . . Behavioral question #3 How have you managed conflict within your organization? Well, conflict is inevitable, and in my view, if it is handled with empathy for both participants while maintaining accountability for results, it can be an opportunity to learn more about each other and build trust and improve collaboration. The conflict I want to talk about was between someone who reported to me and someone on another team and was related to overlapping roles and responsibilities . . . The importance of principles Once you have a strong list of principles, you can plug them into almost any behavioral question and nail the response. And if your interview is on video, you can write each of your values on a post and attach them to your monitor. This will act as a reminder to cue you during the interview. Then you can kick off any response with an articulation of your values and priorities. This will ensure that your interviewer gets a true sense not just of what youve done, but of how you approach problem-solving and what you stand for.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||