Answer:
Legal and Illegal Interview Questions:
Legal:
How many times a month were you late for work at your last job?
Did you graduate from high school?
Illegal:
Do you have any mental illnesses?
What year did you graduate from high school?
Explanation:
Employers of labor should be aware of some interview questions, which are deemed legal, and some others that may be deemed illegal to ask job candidates. For this reason, employers should be careful to ensure they play by the rules. The illegal questions are considered so because they tend to exacerbate discrimination. Examples of interview questions that are deemed illegal are questions relating to age. Others include questions about marital status and parental status. Some other illegal questions relate to citizenship status, mental illness status, religious affiliations, and race or skin color.
Answer:
he primary objectives of the JTTF are: 1) the prevention and disruption of terrorist activity by implementing the full range of resources available to investigate terrorist incidents; and 2) the vigorous prosecution of those who have committed, or intend to commit, terrorist acts in the United States.
Answer:
The constitution created the Supreme Court and authorized Congress to pass laws establishing a system of lower courts. In the federal court system's present form, 94 district-level trial courts and 13 courts of appeals sit below the Supreme Court.
Explanation:
Answer:
true
Rural collisions are often fatal, primarily because the quiet roads and open spaces give drivers a false sense of safety. ... Drivers are more likely to be involved in a fatal collision on a rural road because There are fewer signs, signals, and traffic control devices. Roadways are often poorly lit.
Explanation:
hope this helps sorry if it didn't have a good rest of your night :) ❤
Answer:
1. "Loose lips sink ships." Share certain information can jeopardize OpSec, and result in advantages for enemy troops.
2. 1A should protect ALL speech. censoring specific words is a form of bias. People should instead be taught coping skills when presented with ideas they find objectionable. "Hate speech" presumes there is a speaker and a listener. The speaker can share anything he likes. The listener is the regulated party. When presented with objectionable ideas, he has choices: he can choose the respond calmly and reasonably; he can respond with aggression; or, he can ignore it and walk away.
