Robert Peston job ad - whites need not apply
Discussion
Moonhawk said:
Why though - maybe women just like doing other things?
Look at the figures presented on page 50 of this report. Of the 19 subject areas presented - women dominate in all but 6 (and the figures for business are pretty close even though men just pip it) They also dominate in higher education overall - with women now making up ~30% more of the undergraduate and post graduate population than men.
http://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/B...
Why no affirmative action for men in the 13 subject areas where women dominate - or why no push to equalise the number of university entrants?
Also - why just desirable subjects/careers like engineering. If we must encourage more women into engineering for 'equality reasons' then why no push to get more women is s
tty or dangerous jobs like waste collection or mining for the same reason? Surely a woman's perspective is just as important in these roles too?
Equality should be about equality of opportunity - not equality of outcome.
Your race/gender shouldn't hinder you from applying or being successful at a role - but at the same time, to expect every company and every role to reflect a perfect cross section of society is IMO unrealistic.
There is some common sense in the world, thank god! Look at the figures presented on page 50 of this report. Of the 19 subject areas presented - women dominate in all but 6 (and the figures for business are pretty close even though men just pip it) They also dominate in higher education overall - with women now making up ~30% more of the undergraduate and post graduate population than men.
http://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/B...
Why no affirmative action for men in the 13 subject areas where women dominate - or why no push to equalise the number of university entrants?
Also - why just desirable subjects/careers like engineering. If we must encourage more women into engineering for 'equality reasons' then why no push to get more women is s
tty or dangerous jobs like waste collection or mining for the same reason? Surely a woman's perspective is just as important in these roles too?Equality should be about equality of opportunity - not equality of outcome.
Your race/gender shouldn't hinder you from applying or being successful at a role - but at the same time, to expect every company and every role to reflect a perfect cross section of society is IMO unrealistic.
I had this exact argument with someone a couple of years ago (young guy at university racking up £50K of debt on a basket weaving course). I said exactly the same, men and women are different, they have different strengths and weaknesses, different priorities, different interests. Yes of course there is some crossover, but fundamentally we think and work differently, just like most other species of animal.
He was absolutely adamant that this was not the case, men and women were exactly the same, and any difference was simply down to historical gender roles.
Just unable to see it any other way, it seems to be what they're taught as fact these days.
Randy Winkman said:
Rovinghawk said:
2xChevrons said:
Ideally you'd want the demographics of every job role to reflect the national demographics.
Ideally I'd want the demographics to refelct the talent of the successful applicant. That's unprejudiced.Discrimination on ethnicity is wrong. 'Positive' discrimination is still discrimination; it's not so 'positive' when you're in the excluded group.
Rovinghawk said:
fblm said:
Rovinghawk said:
...Xmas party...
That doesn't sound very inclusive! Some of the chaps wished me happy diwali and wanted miners' lights for their hats for the day a short while back. Wy not?
2xChevrons said:
But it's like complaining that being wealthy excludes your kids getting a scholarship, or that you can't apply for tax credits and housing support. The internship is aimed at a specific and disadvantaged set of people who (as studies have shown time and time again) get an unfair deal when applying for jobs on a true 'level playing field'. The white kids can keep applying for jobs in the normal channels where they already have a discreet advantage.
It’s not aimed at a specific set of disadvantaged people, it’s aimed at people who are the same colour as some people who are, statistically, more likely to be disadvantaged.It is no more valid than would be excluding black people as they are more likely to be criminals.
You really don’t get to accept one form of discrimination without legitimising the other.
I’d never turn someone down just because they are the same colour as a criminal, and I’d never employ someone just because they are the same colour as someone who’s suffered discrimination.
Rovinghawk said:
Ideally I'd want the demographics to refelct the talent of the successful applicant. That's unprejudiced.
Demanding that all jobs reflect the demographics of the country (why country, I wonder, why not street, trading estate, town, country or world) is one of the stupidest things that I think that anyone could call for.Senior cardiac surgeons will have trained at a time when the demographics of the U.K. were very different. Aspiring to replace brilliant bus hideously white world-class surgeons with less able but brown replacements is hardly going to help patients.
Discouraging non-white footballers, as they are overrepresented helps no-one either.
Do we aspire to having 80%white runners in every 100m final?
Why? Why would we aspire to such a stupid project?
Ari said:
He was absolutely adamant that this was not the case, men and women were exactly the same, and any difference was simply down to historical gender roles.
1. Men and women are exactly the same. 2. Apart from all that bad stuff men do because they’re men.
3. A more diverse workforce is better for business. Because men and women are different except when they are exactly the same, which of course they are. Except when they’re not. Got it?
James_B said:
Demanding that all jobs reflect the demographics of the country (why country, I wonder, why not street, trading estate, town, country or world) is one of the stupidest things that I think that anyone could call for.
Senior cardiac surgeons will have trained at a time when the demographics of the U.K. were very different. Aspiring to replace brilliant bus hideously white world-class surgeons with less able but brown replacements is hardly going to help patients.
I said 'ideally'. In a perfect world with true 'equality of opportunity' (where out opportunities are not limited by our race, gender, sexual orientation, the way we speak or any other largely superficial factors) the demographics of every role in society would be broadly the same as those for society as a whole. It would show that people were treating society equally, and society was treating people equally. This cannot be a bad thing, and is surely the aim of the 'equal opportunities for all, no affirmative action' side as much as the 'let's be proactive about it for [reasons]' side. Senior cardiac surgeons will have trained at a time when the demographics of the U.K. were very different. Aspiring to replace brilliant bus hideously white world-class surgeons with less able but brown replacements is hardly going to help patients.
It's not a demand that, overnight, we forcibly make every role tally demographically, even if it means putting less-able or -qualified people in those roles. Because that is patently ridiculous and undermines the entire goal.
Equality of opportunity is not even close to existing in the UK at the moment. My attainments in life are in no way proportional to the effort I put in, and yet here I am. Because I started at such a high point that even when I fail I'm still in a better place than someone who has worked like billio to claw up a tiny bit from a much lower starting point. It would have been extremely unlikely that a Bangladeshi kid born in Tower Hamlets would have been afforded the opportunites that I was, and which I have to thank for me getting my current (very enjoyable) job. The strongest determinator of any individual's success in this coutnry is the size of their parents' bank account, so there is no level playing field.
If someone from a BAME background overcomes the social forces already stacked against them and decides to pursue a career in media production, and (overcoming more statistical odds) goes on to secure a good degree from a top-rank university, there's still the fact that someone with a Muslim-sounding name is three times less likely to get called in for an interview than someone called Adam with an identical CV. That's why schemes like this internship exist, because treating people fairly is not the same as treating them the same.
2xChevrons said:
I said 'ideally'. In a perfect world with true 'equality of opportunity' (where out opportunities are not limited by our race, gender, sexual orientation, the way we speak or any other largely superficial factors) the demographics of every role in society would be broadly the same as those for society as a whole.
You'd expect eg a lot more women foundry workers & warehouse workers, a lot more male midwives? It ain't gonna happen because people are different.2xChevrons said:
surely the aim of the 'equal opportunities for all, no affirmative action' side
You call it affirmative action, I call it discriminating against people.2xChevrons said:
treating people fairly is not the same as treating them the same.
I was sure that, sooner or later, the word 'fair' would come into it. Some are perceived as getting a stty deal, so let's make the rest have a stty deal because that's 'fair',2xChevrons said:
I said 'ideally'. In a perfect world with true 'equality of opportunity' (where out opportunities are not limited by our race, gender, sexual orientation, the way we speak or any other largely superficial factors) the demographics of every role in society would be broadly the same as those for society as a whole.interview than someone called Adam with an identical CV.
I know that you said ideally, I understood your post, I disagree with it, it’s a ridiculous aspiration or even expectation.Different groups prefer doing different things. Given an equal playing field there’s still no reason to assume that you’ll get equal interest from male and female, gay and straight, or black and white.
Why, may I ask, do you believe something so ridiculous would be the case?
Let’s take one example. 100m running. Do you expect to see as many disabled, white, female runners in the national team as black males?
What form of discrimination, in your mind, is holding back crippled 70 year-old women from going up against Usain Bolt?
And yes, of course I picked an extreme example to make the point, it’s a valid way to point out why expecting equality of representation is wrong.
In some jobs you can probably expect it, in others you can’t
Carl_Manchester said:
for example if pestons team is looking for a reporter who will focus on reporting on black or muslim community issues that affect women in someonewhere like Lozells or Rotherham the most affective person for the job will be a black or muslim woman.
if you put up an advertisement for the above and a white man applies for either of those roles he may be the best reporter in the world but it does not mean that the people he needs to befriend and obtain information from will be more forthcoming with the info.
if you then turn the white applicant down based on race, i would imagine it will not only waste everyone's time but no doubt break the law.
in my opinion it is far better to use a directed method using a specific route for employers to seek specific types of people for specific roles through government approved units which can be oversaw with regulation.
to me this is what appears to be happening with this specific job posting and that is why i don't have a problem with it.
You can try and dress it up any way you like.if you put up an advertisement for the above and a white man applies for either of those roles he may be the best reporter in the world but it does not mean that the people he needs to befriend and obtain information from will be more forthcoming with the info.
if you then turn the white applicant down based on race, i would imagine it will not only waste everyone's time but no doubt break the law.
in my opinion it is far better to use a directed method using a specific route for employers to seek specific types of people for specific roles through government approved units which can be oversaw with regulation.
to me this is what appears to be happening with this specific job posting and that is why i don't have a problem with it.
If I advertised for a reporter working in a predominantly white area and said non whites need not apply then I would, quite rightly IMHO be open to prosecution.
Discrimination on the basis of anything which does not affect ability has always been perceived as illegal.
It is about time it was.
Equality anyone?
James_B said:
Rovinghawk said:
Ideally I'd want the demographics to refelct the talent of the successful applicant. That's unprejudiced.
Demanding that all jobs reflect the demographics of the country (why country, I wonder, why not street, trading estate, town, country or world) is one of the stupidest things that I think that anyone could call for.Senior cardiac surgeons will have trained at a time when the demographics of the U.K. were very different. Aspiring to replace brilliant bus hideously white world-class surgeons with less able but brown replacements is hardly going to help patients.
Discouraging non-white footballers, as they are overrepresented helps no-one either.
Do we aspire to having 80%white runners in every 100m final?
Why? Why would we aspire to such a stupid project?
Power blackouts are now the norm, engineering projects are failing, product quality is dire and the entire infrastructure is shaky.
Jobs should go to the most qualified and experienced applicant.
The only type of Engineer who does not need qualifications, experience or 2 working brain cells is a social engineer.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff