Get it. The Bert Show.

And the email reads like this. Dear Birch Show, having a debate with the co-owner of my company

that I'm hoping your show can help with. I can never call in because the subject matter

alone would definitely make some never use our business. Without giving away too much,

we're a medium-sized company. What we specialize in is of no consequence, but most of our day is spent in business meetings in or out of our office.

Our clients are roughly 65% men and 35% women.

We both have to agree on the hiring of every, and that's capitalized, every employee.

Up until now, we've never really disagreed, and because we have the same business philosophy, we've become successful quickly.

Here's our debate.

We're in the process of hiring a receptionist, not a huge decision, right?

But for whatever reason, we both really become strongheaded about which employee should get the job.

The receptionist that I want to hire has a fairly solid resume.

She's worked at a handful of reputable Atlanta businesses, and she's armed with good references,

and she's very attractive, very attractive. The receptionist that he is endorsing has a great

resume as well, probably slightly better than the receptionist I want to hire. She's been a receptionist at a few more big name companies in Atlanta than receptionist number one,

and she, too, comes with solid references, but she's not attractive at all.

We're both married, and this has nothing to do with sexual attraction.

Strictly from a business debate, my belief is that a receptionist is a potential client's first impression.

His feeling is that it's way more important to have a receptionist that we know

will be able to handle all the small details that go along with this job.

His feeling is that the less attractive employee is a more qualified fit.

I can agree that I'd be slightly more confident in the less attractive employee is a more qualified fit. I can agree that I'd be

...