11 April 2006 >> If agreeing to a date with someone meant that you had to marry and spend the rest of your life with that person, how many dates would you go on?

France puts employers in much the same position. Once someone is hired, French employment laws make it virtually impossible for that person to be fired. Naturally, this makes companies quite leery about taking on new employees. It’s a huge risk to hire someone who might prove to be lazy or incompetent down the road. But in France, lifetime employment laws mean that employers are stuck.

This sort of economic thinking is one of the reasons that the French unemployment rate for people under 30 rivals the American unemployment rate during the Great Depression. It is also one of the reasons that the French government quite sensibly tried to reform the law.

The proposed change—intended to make hiring younger workers more palatable—was quite modest: new hires under the age of 26 could be fired within the first two years of employment. This way, companies could make sure there’d be a good fit before being locked in to a lifetime commitment. Companies would be more likely to hire people if there was less of a risk of hiring someone who might not work out.

But in France, the prospect of having to earn your job through sustained good performance was just too much for people to bear. So the country erupted in mass strikes and riots, as it tends to do for various reasons every few months. The leadership of France saw all this turmoil and surrendered yet again, as it tends to do every few years:

French President Jacques Chirac has announced that the new youth employment law that sparked weeks of sometimes violent protests will be scrapped.

He said it would be replaced by other measures to tackle youth unemployment.

Millions of students and union members have taken to the streets over the last month in protest against the law, which made it easier to fire young workers.

[...]

The new package of measures includes offering state support for employers hiring young people who face the most difficulties in gaining access to the labour market.

Apparently, the French have figured out that the way to cure the problems of socialism is with more socialism. That hasn’t worked anywhere else on the planet, but I wish the French the best with their noble experiment.

11 April 2006 >> Public schools in Montgomery County, Maryland are granting credit for participating in political protests against immigration reform:

The Montgomery County schools’ decision to grant students community service credit for attending Monday’s immigration rights protest is raising concern among some parents as well as activists who say officials should focus on education, not political advocacy.

[...]

Student participation in the event is being organized by CASA of Maryland Inc., a Silver Spring-based group that works with the Latino community. It is CASA’s role — as organizer — that has some questioning whether the school system is allowing an outside group to push its political agenda on students. “I do understand that CASA offers some worthy services to immigrants and that’s noble, but it’s a stretch to allow students to protest for a particular side of an issue,” said parent Melissa Andersen. “I’m taken aback by it. I think it’s poor judgment.”

[...]

Maryland students are required to put in 60 hours of community service to graduate from high school. They can undertake a number of activities — including working for political campaigns — as long as the work is done for a secular, nonprofit community organization that is tax-exempt and that school officials have approved.

It would be interesting to see what other organizations have been approved by school officials. I think it is unwise to offer school credit in the name of community service for political advocacy. But if the school board insists on granting credit for one type of political activity, then they should be even-handed and give credit without regard to the political orientation of that activity. Otherwise, it is quite obvious that the school system is attempting to encourage students to adopt a particular set of political views.

School board member Stephen N. Abrams [...] said students have the right to express their opinions, and if they choose to do so at a political rally — as long as they abide by the credit rules — they should not be barred from participating.

“The last time I checked, the First Amendment is not a right to question what the speech is,” he said. “I’m sure if students were participating in a tax cap rally, these same people would not be objecting to that.”

Perhaps. But would the school district offer credit for a rally in support of lower taxes? Do such rallies even exist? Maybe that’s part of the problem. For whatever reason, leftists seem more prone to public protesting than others. People who want lower taxes are more likely to engage in other forms of political activity instead of marching around holding signs and chanting slogans.

I’m attempting to find out whether the Montgomery County school system has ever given credit to students for attending other political rallies.

Hopefully, I’ll be able to report my findings soon.