Looking for:
– Careers in Europe
Interview for the Job – The names of the best-qualified candidates are forwarded to the supervisor or hiring official. If you are one of the best-qualified candidates, the supervisor or . AdJoin the largest career site focused on USA jobs requiring security clearances. Find USA jobs requiring security clearance from defense and intelligence has been visited by 10K+ users in the past monthTypes: Tech, Engineering, Aerospace, Intelligence, Logistics, Cybersecurity, Linguist. Summary. The ideal candidate for this position will have experience operating within a emergency operations center, with a high emphasis on customer service, and can adapt to a rapidly .
Remarks by President Biden on the Continued Battle for the Soul of the Nation – The White House
Jobs usa gov federal jobs hiring immediately hiring sacred ground enable JavaScript in your web browser; otherwise some parts of this site might not work properly. There are job openings in federal jobs usa gov federal jobs hiring immediately hiring sacred ground across the country. There, you can:. Search for jobsincluding ones in high demand. Find student job opportunities with the government.
Learn about government jobs for non-U. Sign up with login. If you want to work for a specific agency, find its website through the A-Z Index of Government Agencies. Explore local читать virtual federal hiring events and training opportunities.
There is never an application fee or a testing fee to apply for a government or U. Postal Service читать. If you’ve увидеть больше in the military and want to find a federal job, check out FedsHireVets. It has information on:. Uses Schedule Aa non-competitive hring process. It’s faster and easier than the competitive process. Provides reasonable accommodations to qualified employees.
You can also apply for jobs through the competitive hiring hround. It covers Schedule A and other factors in applying for a job. Find summer jobs, internships, and permanent positions through the Workforce Recruitment Program. Special hiring authorities let agencies appoint vets with service-connected disabilities to jobs.
Ask a real person any government-related question for free. They’ll get you the answer or let you know where to find it. Share This Page:. Do you have a question? Talk to a live USA.
– Jobs usa gov federal jobs hiring immediately hiring sacred ground
She asked the hospital to accommodate her religious beliefs by allowing her to trade assignments with other nurses in the Labor and Delivery Unit as needed. The hospital instead offered to permit Yvonne to transfer, without a reduction in pay or benefits, to a vacant nursing position in the Newborn Intensive Care Unit, which did not perform abortion procedures. As described below, [] an employee should be accommodated in his or her current position absent an undue hardship.
In addition, the obligation to provide reasonable accommodation absent undue hardship is a continuing obligation. An employer can refuse to provide a reasonable accommodation if it would pose an undue hardship.
David wears long hair pursuant to his Native American religious beliefs. When the restaurant manager informs David that if offered the position he will have to cut his hair, David explains that he keeps his hair long based on his religious beliefs and offers to wear it held up with a clip or under a hair net. The manager refuses this accommodation and denies David the position based on his long hair. Since the evidence indicated that David could have been accommodated, without undue hardship, by wearing his hair in a ponytail or held up with a clip, the employer will be liable for denial of reasonable accommodation and discriminatory failure to hire.
Management contends that the dress code is essential to the safe and efficient operation of the mill and has evidence that it was imposed following several accidents in which skirts worn by employees were caught in the same type of mill machinery that Patricia operates. Because the evidence establishes that wearing pants is truly necessary for safety reasons, the accommodation requested by Patricia poses an undue hardship. A proposed religious accommodation poses an undue hardship if it would deprive another employee of a job preference or other benefit guaranteed by a bona fide seniority system or collective bargaining agreement CBA.
Susan, an employee of Quick Corp. Quick Corp. If Susan can find qualified coworkers voluntarily willing to swap shifts to accommodate her sincerely held religious beliefs, the employer could be found liable for denial of reasonable accommodation if it refuses to permit the swap to occur. The existence of the collectively bargained system for determining weekend shifts should not result in the denial of accommodation if a voluntary swap can be arranged by the employee without violating the system or otherwise posing an undue hardship.
The result would be the same if Quick Corp. However, if other employees were unwilling to swap shifts or were otherwise harmed by not requiring Susan to work on the shift in question, or the employer would be subject to other operational costs that were more than de minimis by allowing Susan to swap shifts, then the employer can demonstrate undue hardship. If a religious practice conflicts with a legally mandated federal, state, or local security requirement, an employer need not accommodate the practice because doing so would create an undue hardship.
If a security requirement has been unilaterally imposed by the employer and is not required by law or regulation, courts will engage in a fact-specific inquiry to decide whether it would be an undue hardship to modify or eliminate the requirement to accommodate an employee who has a religious conflict. Patrick is employed as a correctional officer at a state prison, and his brother William is employed as a grocery store manager.
Both Patrick and William seek permission from their respective employers to wear a fez at work as an act of faith on a particular holy day as part of their religious expression. Both employers deny the request, citing a uniformly applied workplace policy prohibiting employees from wearing any type of head covering.
Harvinder, a Sikh who works in a hospital, wears a small sheathed kirpan religious article of faith resembling a knife strapped and hidden underneath her clothing, as a symbol of her religious commitment to defend truth and moral values. Harvinder explained to Bill that her faith requires her to wear a kirpan in order to comply with the Sikh Code of Conduct and gave him literature explaining that the kirpan is a religious article of faith, not a weapon.
She also showed him the kirpan, allowing him to see that it was no sharper than scissors, box cutters, cake knives, paper cutters, and other secular objects in the workplace.
Nevertheless, Bill told her that she would be terminated if she continued to wear the kirpan at work. Absent evidence that allowing Harvinder to wear the kirpan would pose an undue hardship in the factual circumstances of this case, the hospital is liable for denial of accommodation. Under Title VII, an employer or other covered entity may use a variety of methods to provide reasonable accommodations to its employees. The most common methods are: 1 flexible scheduling; 2 voluntary substitutes or swaps of shifts and assignments; 3 lateral transfers or changes in job assignment; and 4 modifying workplace practices, policies, or procedures.
An employer may be able to reasonably accommodate an employee by allowing flexible arrival and departure times, floating or optional holidays, flexible work breaks, use of lunch time in exchange for early departure, staggered work hours, and other means to enable an employee to make up time lost due to the observance of religious practices.
Rashid, a janitor, tells his employer on his first day of work that he practices Islam and will need to pray at several prescribed times during the workday in order to adhere to his religious practice of praying at five times each day, for several minutes, with hand washing beforehand.
The employer objects because its written policy allows one fifteen-minute break in the middle of each morning and afternoon. Thus, Rashid is entitled to accommodation. A large employer operating a fleet of buses had a policy of refusing to accept driver applications unless the applicant agreed that he or she was available to be scheduled to work any shift, seven days a week.
This policy would violate Title VII if applied to discriminate against applicants who refrain from work on certain days for religious reasons, by failing to allow for the provision of religious accommodation absent undue hardship. The reasonable accommodation requirement can often be satisfied without undue hardship where a volunteer with substantially similar qualifications is available and willing to switch shifts, either for a single absence or multiple absences, including absences occurring over an extended period of time.
Some means of doing this which [covered entities] should consider are: to publicize policies regarding accommodation and voluntary substitution; to promote an atmosphere in which such substitutions are favorably regarded; to provide a central file, [physical or electronic] bulletin board or other means for matching voluntary substitutes with positions for which substitutes are needed.
Of course, if allowing a swap or other accommodation would not provide the coverage the employer needs for its business operations or otherwise pose an undue hardship, the accommodation does not have to be granted. There were enough servers on duty at any given time to perform this singing without affecting service.
The manager refused any accommodation. If Kim files a Title VII charge alleging denial of religious accommodation, the EEOC will find cause because the restaurant could have accommodated her with little or no expense or disruption. Neil, a pharmacist, was hired by a large corporation that operates numerous large pharmacies at which more than one pharmacist is on duty during all hours of operation.
Neil informed his employer that he refuses on religious grounds to participate in distributing contraceptives or answering any customer inquiries about contraceptives. The employer reasonably accommodated Neil by offering to allow Neil to signal discreetly to a coworker who would take over servicing any customer who telephoned, faxed, or came to the pharmacy regarding contraceptives.
In the above example, assume that instead of facilitating the assistance of such customers by a coworker, Neil leaves on hold indefinitely those who call on the phone about a contraceptive rather than transferring their calls, and walks away from in-store customers who seek to fill a contraceptive prescription rather than signaling a coworker.
Neil refuses to signal another employee or inform the customer on the phone that he is placing them on a brief hold while he gets another employee. The employer may discipline or terminate Neil if he disrupts business operations. The employee should generally be accommodated in his or her current position if doing so does not pose an undue hardship. If no such accommodation is possible, the employer needs to consider whether lateral transfer is a possible accommodation.
An electrical utility lineman requests accommodation of his Sabbath observance, but because the nature of his position requires being available to handle emergency problems at any time, there is no accommodation that would permit the lineman to remain in his position without posing an undue hardship.
The employer can accommodate the lineman by offering a lateral transfer to another assignment at the same pay, if available. If, however, no job at the same pay is readily available, then the employer could satisfy its obligation to reasonably accommodate the lineman by offering to transfer him to a different job, even at lower pay, if one is available.
An employer may have to make an exception to its policies, procedures, or practices in order to grant a religious accommodation. Religious grooming practices may relate, for example, to shaving or hair length. Prakash, who works for CutX, a surgical instrument manufacturer, does not shave or trim his facial hair because of his Sikh religious observance. When he seeks a promotion to manage the division responsible for sterilizing the instruments, his employer tells him that, to work in that division, he must shave or trim his beard because otherwise his beard may contaminate the sterile field.
When Prakash explains that he cannot trim his beard for religious reasons, the employer offers to allow Prakash to wear two face masks instead of trimming his beard. Prakash thinks that wearing two masks is unreasonable for reasons unrelated to his religious practice and files a Title VII charge. Some courts have concluded that it would pose an undue hardship if an employer was required to accommodate a religious dress or grooming practice that conflicts with the public image the employer wishes to convey to customers.
Nasreen, a Muslim ticket agent for a commercial airline, wears a hijab headscarf to work at the airport ticket counter. After September 11, , her manager objected, telling Nasreen that the customers might think she was sympathetic to terrorist hijackers. Nasreen explains to her manager that wearing the hijab is her religious practice and continues to wear it. Customer fears or prejudices do not amount to undue hardship. In addition, if the commercial airline had denied Nasreen the position due to perceptions of customer preferences about religious attire, that would also be disparate treatment based on religion in violation of Title VII, because it would be the same as refusing to hire Nasreen because she is a Muslim.
There may be limited situations in which the need for uniformity of appearance is so important that modifying the dress code would pose an undue hardship. If any employee needs to use a workplace facility as a reasonable accommodation, for example use of a quiet area for prayer during break time, the employer should accommodate the request under Title VII unless it would pose an undue hardship.
If the employer allows employees to use the facilities at issue for non-religious activities not related to work, it may be difficult for the employer to demonstrate that allowing the facilities to be used in the same manner for religious activities is not a reasonable accommodation or poses an undue hardship. The supervisor must grant this request if it would not pose an undue hardship.
An undue hardship would exist, for example, if the only conference room is used for work meetings at that time. An employer has an obligation to reasonably accommodate an applicant when scheduling a test or administering other selection procedures, where the applicant has informed the employer of a sincerely held religious belief that conflicts with a pre-employment testing requirement, unless undue hardship would result.
Whether it poses an undue hardship for an employer to provide an alternative means of identification for matters such as government forms, building security, or timekeeping will depend on the facts. Absent undue hardship, Title VII requires employers and unions to accommodate an employee who holds religious objections to joining or financially supporting a union.
Some employees may seek to display religious icons or messages at their workstations or use a particular religious phrase when greeting others. Others may seek to proselytize by engaging in one-on-one discussions regarding religious beliefs or distributing literature. Still others may seek to engage in prayer at their workstations or to use other areas of the workplace for either individual or group prayer, study, or meeting.
In some of these situations, an employee might request accommodation in advance to permit such religious expression. In other situations, the employer will not learn of the situation or be called upon to consider any action unless it receives complaints about the religious expression from either other employees or customers.
To determine whether allowing or continuing to permit an employee to pray, proselytize, or engage in other forms of religiously oriented expression in the workplace would pose an undue hardship, employers should consider the potential disruption, if any, that will be posed by permitting the expression of religious belief. Religious expression can create undue hardship if it disrupts the work of other employees or constitutes—or threatens to constitute—unlawful harassment.
Conduct that is disruptive can still constitute an undue hardship, even if it does not rise to the level of unlawful harassment.
Since an employer has a duty under Title VII to protect employees from harassment, it would be an undue hardship to accommodate expression that is harassing.
It is necessary to make a case-by-case determination regarding whether the effect on coworkers actually is an undue hardship. Mere subjective offense or disagreement with unpopular religious views or practices by coworkers is not sufficient to rise to the level of unlawful harassment. However, this does not require waiting until the unwelcome behavior becomes severe or pervasive. Susan works as an architect in a private office on an upper floor, where she occasionally interacts with coworkers, but not with clients.
Roger is a security guard stationed at a desk in the front lobby of the XYZ building through which all employees, clients, and other visitors must enter. XYZ orders both to remove the poster despite the fact that both explained that they felt a religious obligation to display it, and despite the fact that there have been no complaints from coworkers or clients.
Susan and Roger file charges alleging denial of religious accommodation. The employer will probably be unable to show that allowing Susan to display a religious message in her personal workspace posed an undue hardship, unless there was evidence of disruption to the business or the workplace which resulted.
Helen, an employee in a mental health facility that served a religiously and ethnically diverse clientele, frequently spoke with clients about religious issues and shared religious tracts with them as a way to help solve their problems, despite being instructed not to do so.
The employer has the right to control speech that threatens to impede provision of effective and efficient services. Some employers have integrated their own religious beliefs or practices into the workplace, and they are entitled to do so. Michael objects to participating because he believes it conflicts with his own sincerely held religious beliefs. He asks his supervisor to allow him to arrive at the meeting after the prayer. Each December, the president of XYZ corporation directs that several wreaths be placed around the office building and a tree be displayed in the lobby.
Several employees complain that to accommodate their non-Christian religious beliefs, the employer should take down the wreaths and tree, or alternatively should add holiday decorations associated with other religions. Title VII does not require that XYZ corporation remove the wreaths and tree or add holiday decorations associated with other religions.
As part of its effort to promote employee health and productivity, the new president of a company institutes weekly mandatory on-site meditation classes led by a local spiritualist.
Angelina explains to her supervisor that the meditation conflicts with her sincerely held religious beliefs and asks to be excused from participating. The training does not tell employees to value different sexual orientations but simply discusses and reinforces laws and conduct rules requiring employees not to discriminate against or harass other employees based on sexual orientation and to treat one another professionally. Because an employer needs to make sure that its employees know about and comply with such laws and workplace rules, it would be an undue hardship for XYZ to excuse Lucille from the training.
Where a given religion is strongly associated — or perceived to be associated — with a certain national origin, the same facts may state a claim of both religious and national origin discrimination. Title VII prohibits retaliation by an employer, employment agency, or labor organization because an individual has engaged in protected activity.
Jenny requests that she be excused from daily employer-sponsored Christian prayer meetings because she is an atheist. Her supervisor insists that she attend, but she persists in her request that she should be excused and explains that requiring her to attend is offensive to her religious beliefs. She takes her request to human resources and informs them that requiring her to attend these prayer meetings is offensive to her religious beliefs. Motivated by reprisal, her supervisor shortly thereafter gives her an unjustified poor performance rating and denies her requests to attend training that is approved for similarly situated employees.
This retaliation violates Title VII. See Exec. Order No. Because the Commission is issuing this document as interpretive guidance, within the recognized constraints of its authority, the Commission concludes that the guidance procedures under Executive Order , as codified in EEOC regulations at 29 CFR Accordingly, the Commission states that:.
Pursuant to Section 4 a iii D of Executive Order , an agency submitting a significant guidance document to OIRA for review should demonstrate how the guidance document complies with Executive Orders , , , [] , and It will not adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities.
It will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency, nor will they materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof. The guidance will maximize net benefits and reduce the burden on the public by clarifying the legal standards applicable to religious discrimination claims, presenting typical scenarios in which religious discrimination may arise, and providing guidance to employers on how to balance the needs of individuals in a diverse religious climate.
The guidance is not being issued because of any retrospective review. The guidance will reduce the burden on the public by clarifying the legal standards the EEOC will apply to religious discrimination claims.
The guidance will be an Executive Order deregulatory action. Pursuant to 29 C. The EEOC received 71 unique comments [] from individuals, organizations, and members of Congress on the proposed Compliance Manual on Religious Discrimination, which was posted for public input on www. A number of these comments were submitted on behalf of multiple organizations or officeholders, including one on behalf of 51 organizations and another on behalf of 44 organizations.
Comment : Numerous organizational and Congressional commenters asserted that there was insufficient opportunity for stakeholder consultation and inadequate time allotted for Commissioner and public input.
These commenters requested that the Commission withdraw rather than finalize the proposed guidance. Several commenters also expressed concerns with listening sessions that the General Counsel held and the commenters felt that they undermined the comment period. Response : The Commission engaged in an internal process and inter-agency consultation before issuing the proposal, and then provided a standard day public input period. This is the first significant guidance that the Commission has issued under the regulations found at 29 CFR In , the public was not given an opportunity to comment on a proposed draft of the guidance.
The comment period yielded many detailed comments from a wide range of stakeholders representing many differing perspectives. Moreover, issuance of both the proposal and of the final guidance was subject to review and clearance by the Office of Management and Budget. Many public commenters noted that the update is needed and timely.
The General Counsel did not seek comments on the proposed guidance and instead encouraged participants to submit comments through the formal process, if they were interested.
Furthermore, the listening sessions in no way prevented the public from having the opportunity to comment. Comment : Some commenters expressed concern that the draft did not make sufficiently clear that Title VII protects against discrimination based on a lack of religious faith.
Response : The Commission has made additions to reference repeatedly that discrimination based on a lack of religious faith is prohibited. Response : The final guidance has deleted this language. Some commenters asked the Commission to state that religious organizations are barred from discrimination based on race, color, sex, national origin, or other bases, even if motivated by a religious belief.
Response : The final guidance clearly states that religious organizations are subject to the Title VII prohibitions against discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin as well as the anti-discrimination provisions of the ADEA, ADA, and GINA , and related retaliation, but are permitted to assert the statutory exemption as an affirmative defense.
Response : The final guidance has streamlined the discussion of the ministerial exception and has clarified how the Commission will procedurally address assertions of the defense. Response : The final guidance refines treatment of the cited authorities in this section, including explanations of the outcome in cases in which RFRA was raised as a defense to EEO enforcement. Comment : The Sikh Coalition requested that an example in this section be revised to illustrate a claim of unlawful segregation of those who wear religious garb, and also requested various descriptions of ritual practices in this and other sections to improve accuracy and reduce rather than reinforce bias or stereotypes.
Comment : Numerous commenters asked the Commission to clarify and further emphasize that consensual non-harassing conversations about religious topics are not potential harassment of coworkers. Response : The final guidance includes additional statements and examples illustrating instances of non-harassing, non-disruptive religious expression.
Comment : Some commenters recommended that the Commission address whether or when employee statements on private social media may implicate the EEO laws with respect to discrimination, including harassment, either by or against religious employees. Response : The final guidance adds additional authority to the discussion of social media and harassment. Comment : With respect to balancing harassment and accommodation obligations, numerous commenters asked the Commission to make clear that employers are permitted to, and should, take remedial action once on notice of unwelcome potential harassment on any basis, even if the harassing conduct is not yet severe or pervasive.
Requiring an employee to work without religious accommodation where a work rule conflicts with his religious beliefs necessarily alters the terms and conditions of his employment for the worse. Department of Health and Human Services regarding rights of those with objections to participating in certain health care duties could be misleading with respect to the requirements under either those laws or Title VII.
Walgreen Co. Response : The final guidance deletes this citation to ensure clarity regarding the current legal standard. These examples are intended to clarify the legal principles for which they are used and do not purport to represent the religious beliefs or practices of all members of the cited religions.
Clayton Cnty. Hardison , U. Note: Various state and local laws extend beyond Title VII in terms of the protected bases covered, the discrimination prohibited, the accommodation required, and the legal standards and defenses that apply.
Dynamics, Convair Aerospace Div. See, e. GAF Corp. United States , U. Seeger , U. Mercy Cath. Fort Bend Cnty. Union Independiente de la Autoridad de Acueductos , F. Kelly Servs. Great Lakes Cos. And so an atheist. It may not be hostile to any religion or to the advocacy of no religion; and it may not aid, foster, or promote one religion or religious theory against another or even against the militant opposite.
The First Amendment mandates governmental neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and nonreligion. Grumet , U. In fiscal year , EEOC received 1, religious discrimination charges, accounting for 2. See 42 U. Claims under various state or local laws may be analyzed under different standards. Investigators should contact the Office of Legal Counsel if questions arise about how to appropriately analyze charges brought against government entities.
Although this document concerns Title VII, employers and employees should note that there may be state and local laws in their jurisdiction prohibiting religious discrimination in employment, some of which may be parallel to Title VII and some of which may afford broader coverage. Since the Abercrombie decision was issued, some lower courts have nevertheless continued to characterize denial of accommodation as a distinct cause of action.
Rhode Island , U. Smith , U. City of Hialeah , U. Dade Christian Schs. Meyers , F. Courts are not arbiters of scriptural interpretation. The courts have as well. See supra note 8. However, the resolution of that question is not to turn upon a judicial perception of the particular belief or practice in question; religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection.
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. Pennsylvania , F. Local Union , United Auto. Implement Workers of Am. The Commission has consistently applied this standard in its decisions. Watkins , U.
Mercy Catholic Med. Yogi , F. See Commission Decision No. King Soopers , F. Pena , F. Yoder , U. See also Shelton v. Gadling-Cole v. Chester Univ. Shalala , 9 F. Hotel Peabody, GP , F. At Sevita Health, our team members make an impact on the people they serve, helping them grow, learn, and live well.
As a Sevita Riverton Country Club is a member-owned family oriented private country club committed to providing superior facilities, quality programs and a variety of services and Center For Family Services is a strong and innovative non-profit organization dedicated to improving lives. With services across New Jersey and a history dating back to , Dirt Busters is a full service janitorial company that specializes in carpet cleaning, floor cleaning and daily janitorial services.
Dirt Busters is looking for Green Side Up is currently looking for an individual to join our team as a full-time, Lawn Care Technician. Primary responsibilities include: Applying fertilizer Rutgers University—Camden is a diverse, research-intensive campus of approximately 7, undergraduate and graduate students and 1, faculty and staff members located Our brands connect millions of people and Skip to Main Content.
Loading Close. Do Not Show Again Close. Website Sign In. Home Jobs. Open the calendar popup. Job Opportunities Search through employment opportunities. Subscribe to job posting notifications to be automatically alerted of the latest career opportunities by clicking on the Notify Me button. Businesses wishing to submit a job posting, please click here.
New County Jobs category below. Steps 1. Listing Information This section is complete 2. Job Details This section is complete 3. Preview and Submit This section is complete. Feature this listing for free What’s this? Job ID. Special Requirements. Continue Go Back. Preview and Submit.
Clerk 1- Dept. Full Description Apply Online. Forward, to the future. A future of possibility. A future to build and dream and hope. I know this nation. I know you, the American people. I know your courage. I know your hearts. And I know our history.
This is a nation that honors our Constitution. We do not reject it. This is a nation that believes in the rule of law. We do not repudiate it. This is a nation that respects free and fair elections. We honor the will of the people. We do not deny it. And this is a nation that rejects violence as a political tool. We do not encourage violence. We are still an America that believes in honesty and decency and respect for others, patriotism, liberty, justice for all, hope, possibilities.
We are still, at our core, a democracy. And yet history tells us that blind loyalty to a single leader and a willingness to engage in political violence is fatal to democracy. We have to defend it, protect it, stand up for it — each and every one of us. Democrats, independents, mainstream Republicans: We must be stronger, more determined, and more committed to saving American democracy than MAGA Republicans are to — to destroying American democracy.
We, the people, will not let anyone or anything tear us apart. Today, there are dangers around us we cannot allow to prevail. It can never be an acceptable tool. So I want to say this plain and simple: There is no place for political violence in America.
We saw law enforcement brutally attacked on January the 6th. And — can you believe it? On top of that, there are public figures — today, yesterday, and the day before — predicting and all but calling for mass violence and rioting in the streets.
This is inflammatory. And we, the people, must say: This is not who we are. We each have to reject political violence with — with all the moral clarity and conviction this nation can muster. Look, I know poli- — politics can be fierce and mean and nasty in America. I get it. I believe in the give-and-take of politics, in disagreement and debate and dissent. But democracy endures only if we, the people, respect the guardrails of the republic. Only if we, the people, accept the results of free and fair elections.
Only if we, the people, see politics not as total war but mediation of our differences. Democracy cannot survive when one side believes there are only two outcomes to an election: either they win or they were cheated. Products Many of our clients are under pressure to keep pace with today’s rapidly changing tech environment, which is why we are constantly adding new products to our suite of tools.
Explore our Products page to learn more. Expertise We’re building value and opportunity by investing in cybersecurity, analytics, digital solutions, engineering and science, and consulting. Markets Civil Government Civil Government Whether ensuring citizen safety, security, and well-being or boosting our national competitiveness, we work shoulder-to-shoulder with civil government clients to help them deliver on their public service missions.
Commercial Booz Allen Commercial delivers advanced cyber defenses to the Fortune and Global Defense As the nation’s military services take on new missions, adopt innovative technologies, tackle acquisition and budgeting challenges, and address warfighters’ medical needs, our experts are there to help.
Health We’re helping health and life sciences organizations across the public and private sectors navigate their rapidly changing environments and complex markets to drive more effective treatment and business approaches. Our homeland security teams work to address some of the most difficult issues facing government leaders.
International Our strategy and technology consultants have empowered our international clients with the knowledge and experience they need to build their own local resources and capabilities. Space See how we deliver space defense capabilities with analytics, AI, cybersecurity, and PNT to strengthen information superiority. Transportation Effectively integrating emerging technology, public policy, and efficient operations is the most pressing challenge facing all our clients.
Our expertise allows us to add value from conceptual design through implementation. Markets Our clients call upon us to work on their hardest problems—delivering effective health care, protecting warfighters and their families, keeping our national infrastructure secure, bringing into focus the traditional boundaries between consumer products and manufacturing as those boundaries blur.
Insights Insights Booz Allen was founded on the notion that we could help companies succeed by bringing them expert, candid advice and an outside perspective on their business. The analysis and perspective generated by that talent can be found in the case studies and thought leadership produced by our people. Careers Search Jobs Search Jobs Search open jobs and find positions that match your skills, interests, and location.
Search openings and find out how you can support our meaningful missions. Life at Booz Allen Learn more about our culture, our people, and our promise to employees. Locations We have offices across the globe. Discover where you fit at Booz Allen.
Comentários