No evidence the UK is institutionally racist
Discussion
bigothunter said:
I am a white man and I'm sorry. You choose 
As for Racism, I'm just a white guy. When I grew up in London in 80s/90s as long as you were not a dick head no issues white and black kids playing even in the "slums" or "ghettos" whatever they are called.
Now I still have many black / Muslim / Sikh friends all are wonderful people , we never "talk" about racism as such but whenever we've been out together at events , shows or at the pub , I've never witnessed any racism, and they all have reasonably senior jobs paying them good money - so I can't really see how there is institutional racism, no doubt, there are some racist people, but I don't think "the system" is racist.
If anything, it's probably anti-racist with all of the minority quotas etc.
I hope this will end the BLM movement which I believe does more harm than good , but what do I know
(nothing is the answer!)rscott said:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/am...
They sent 3,200 job applications off, changing names of the applicants to reflect different ethnic groups.
While 24% of white British applicants received a call back from UK employers, only 15% of ethnic minority applicants did.
Employers don't have racist employment policies, any racial bias will be by the Individual. There is no institutional racism in the UK, racists yes though. They sent 3,200 job applications off, changing names of the applicants to reflect different ethnic groups.
While 24% of white British applicants received a call back from UK employers, only 15% of ethnic minority applicants did.
rscott said:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/am...
They sent 3,200 job applications off, changing names of the applicants to reflect different ethnic groups.
While 24% of white British applicants received a call back from UK employers, only 15% of ethnic minority applicants did.
Compared to White British applicants, people of:
Pakistani heritage had to make 70% more applications
Nigerian and South Asian heritage 80% more applications
Middle Eastern and north African heritage 90% more applications
Thank you I thought there had been studies and didn't look to find one but that's the kind of thing I was referring to.They sent 3,200 job applications off, changing names of the applicants to reflect different ethnic groups.
While 24% of white British applicants received a call back from UK employers, only 15% of ethnic minority applicants did.
Compared to White British applicants, people of:
Pakistani heritage had to make 70% more applications
Nigerian and South Asian heritage 80% more applications
Middle Eastern and north African heritage 90% more applications
In the example Murph replied to the chap would have seen the Muslim sounding name.
Like I said of course I'm not suggesting it's everyone but I'd be interested how those saying "nothing to see here" explain away those sorts of findings?
It's easy to focus on the phrase "institutionally racist as a nation" and proudly declare everything is fine whilst ignoring that the report explicitly points out that overt racism still happens.
Still a lot of work to do.
cwis said:
rscott said:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/am...
They sent 3,200 job applications off, changing names of the applicants to reflect different ethnic groups.
While 24% of white British applicants received a call back from UK employers, only 15% of ethnic minority applicants did.
Compared to White British applicants, people of:
Pakistani heritage had to make 70% more applications
Nigerian and South Asian heritage 80% more applications
Middle Eastern and north African heritage 90% more applications
.
Where was the foreign sounding name without a race change as a control? They sent 3,200 job applications off, changing names of the applicants to reflect different ethnic groups.
While 24% of white British applicants received a call back from UK employers, only 15% of ethnic minority applicants did.
Compared to White British applicants, people of:
Pakistani heritage had to make 70% more applications
Nigerian and South Asian heritage 80% more applications
Middle Eastern and north African heritage 90% more applications
.
My surname is Czech - I get a lot more response to applications if I "accidentally" anglicize my name, and correct it at interview. Ta grandpa!
Nothing to do with race, all to do with "foreign".
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Thank you I thought there had been studies and didn't look to find one but that's the kind of thing I was referring to.
In the example Murph replied to the chap would have seen the Muslim sounding name.
Like I said of course I'm not suggesting it's everyone but I'd be interested how those saying "nothing to see here" explain away those sorts of findings?
It's easy to focus on the phrase "institutionally racist as a nation" and proudly declare everything is fine whilst ignoring that the report explicitly points out that overt racism still happens.
Still a lot of work to do.
Perhaps some employers look at the name and think the risk of getting into a wrangle about prayer rooms, types of food available, offensive jokes or something else with someone who can cry racism at any point is not worth the trouble?In the example Murph replied to the chap would have seen the Muslim sounding name.
Like I said of course I'm not suggesting it's everyone but I'd be interested how those saying "nothing to see here" explain away those sorts of findings?
It's easy to focus on the phrase "institutionally racist as a nation" and proudly declare everything is fine whilst ignoring that the report explicitly points out that overt racism still happens.
Still a lot of work to do.
rscott said:
Murph7355 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: ...
I've literally read people on here say they looked less favourably on applications from people with Muslim sounding names because they expect they'll be awkward and want special treatment around prayers etc.
And you extrapolate that to mean it's rife maybe? Oh dear BS.I've literally read people on here say they looked less favourably on applications from people with Muslim sounding names because they expect they'll be awkward and want special treatment around prayers etc.
Every large organisation I've seen goes to great lengths to avoid any accusation of bias/unfairness. There is no way, IMO, that a meaningful slice of the job market is subject to what you have literally read on here.
They sent 3,200 job applications off, changing names of the applicants to reflect different ethnic groups.
While 24% of white British applicants received a call back from UK employers, only 15% of ethnic minority applicants did.
Compared to White British applicants, people of:
Pakistani heritage had to make 70% more applications
Nigerian and South Asian heritage 80% more applications
Middle Eastern and north African heritage 90% more applications
I have a friend who's Polish. He gets much better responses to applications when he uses the English equivalent of his name.
I'm not saying that's necessarily better, but it seems that the narrative is always white people not liking black/brown people. The fact is most people are tribal in one way or another.
bigothunter said:
Mr Tidy said:
Probably true in the case of Nicholas Hamilton's exploits in the BTCC!
I have the utmost sympathy for his health issues and admire him for taking part, but can't help thinking he wouldn't be on the grid without a bit of influence (and maybe finance) from his brother.
Isn't that discrimination though in favour of those with BAME backgrounds - or does it only work one way? As usual!
Those with BAME backgrounds are considered to be victims of racism. As such, there is no possibility of BAME people holding racist views. Same logic applies to women - they cannot be sexist.I have the utmost sympathy for his health issues and admire him for taking part, but can't help thinking he wouldn't be on the grid without a bit of influence (and maybe finance) from his brother.
Isn't that discrimination though in favour of those with BAME backgrounds - or does it only work one way? As usual!
nb This interpretation is common in professional circles. It is not necessarily my own view.
JuanCarlosFandango said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Thank you I thought there had been studies and didn't look to find one but that's the kind of thing I was referring to.
In the example Murph replied to the chap would have seen the Muslim sounding name.
Like I said of course I'm not suggesting it's everyone but I'd be interested how those saying "nothing to see here" explain away those sorts of findings?
It's easy to focus on the phrase "institutionally racist as a nation" and proudly declare everything is fine whilst ignoring that the report explicitly points out that overt racism still happens.
Still a lot of work to do.
Perhaps some employers look at the name and think the risk of getting into a wrangle about prayer rooms, types of food available, offensive jokes or something else with someone who can cry racism at any point is not worth the trouble?In the example Murph replied to the chap would have seen the Muslim sounding name.
Like I said of course I'm not suggesting it's everyone but I'd be interested how those saying "nothing to see here" explain away those sorts of findings?
It's easy to focus on the phrase "institutionally racist as a nation" and proudly declare everything is fine whilst ignoring that the report explicitly points out that overt racism still happens.
Still a lot of work to do.
Maybe some employers need to widen their social mix.
rscott said:
cwis said:
rscott said:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/am...
They sent 3,200 job applications off, changing names of the applicants to reflect different ethnic groups.
While 24% of white British applicants received a call back from UK employers, only 15% of ethnic minority applicants did.
Compared to White British applicants, people of:
Pakistani heritage had to make 70% more applications
Nigerian and South Asian heritage 80% more applications
Middle Eastern and north African heritage 90% more applications
.
Where was the foreign sounding name without a race change as a control? They sent 3,200 job applications off, changing names of the applicants to reflect different ethnic groups.
While 24% of white British applicants received a call back from UK employers, only 15% of ethnic minority applicants did.
Compared to White British applicants, people of:
Pakistani heritage had to make 70% more applications
Nigerian and South Asian heritage 80% more applications
Middle Eastern and north African heritage 90% more applications
.
My surname is Czech - I get a lot more response to applications if I "accidentally" anglicize my name, and correct it at interview. Ta grandpa!
Nothing to do with race, all to do with "foreign".
So Nabila Khan is getting more callbacks than Abioye Tersoo... So another control on this test could be a poll on "difficulty of pronunciation".
My name by the way is completely unpronounceable to anyone raised in the UK. I don't get callbacks. Czech people correct me when I say it.... Ta Grandpa!
The point I was badly trying to make is that without controls to remove biases that are clearly NOT racist, you're going to see racism everywhere.
I'n not denying that racism exists in the UK but surveys like this do not help to judge it's scale and are counterproductive on a number of levels. If a 8 year old kid was asked to design a survey they would do a better job....
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: ....
Like I said of course I'm not suggesting it's everyone but I'd be interested how those saying "nothing to see here" explain away those sorts of findings?
It's easy to focus on the phrase "institutionally racist as a nation" and proudly declare everything is fine whilst ignoring that the report explicitly points out that overt racism still happens.
Still a lot of work to do.
Who's ignoring anything?Like I said of course I'm not suggesting it's everyone but I'd be interested how those saying "nothing to see here" explain away those sorts of findings?
It's easy to focus on the phrase "institutionally racist as a nation" and proudly declare everything is fine whilst ignoring that the report explicitly points out that overt racism still happens.
Still a lot of work to do.
A nation being "institutionally racist" is a totally different scale of issue than a nation having racists within it.
The narrative was building that the nation is institutionally racist. That seems to have been tackled objectively. Though I doubt it will be accepted.
Individual cases of racism need to be tackled now. Doing that by attempting to tar everyone with a brush is a not a good tactic. It is counterproductive.
Large organisations go to great lengths to try to ensure they cannot be found guilty of bias. Smaller organisations with less checks and balances may not. But only may.
I haven't read the details of the study (if I get chance I will), but how much detail did it go into? What size of organisation were the CVs sent to? Did the same people in those organisations vet all of them? In what order were they received? Were the same volumes sent?
We see waaaaaaaay too many study headlines (all ways) that say one thing but when you look at the details they often don't stand particularly strong scrutiny. The AZ vaccine causes clots....
Castrol for a knave said:
I work with plenty of Muslims, we don't have a prayer room, they get their own lunch, they can banter with the best of them and I have never seen anyone cry "racists" in any shape or form.
Maybe some employers need to widen their social mix.
That doesn't mean it doesn't happen or that there isn't a perception that it can happen among certain employers, which would be an explanation for the results. Maybe some employers need to widen their social mix.
I have only ever witnessed up close what i'd describe as serious and vitriolic "racisism" in that extremely racist language and actions were being consistently used and displayed. It was the family members of a uni mate of mine, at first i though it was some sort of odd "joke" but it wasnt, it was utterly serious. They would hurl abuse toward others in the street, damage property, all because of who they were. The hatred displayed was just so alien to me, it was like it was from a different time, I couldnt get my head around it at all, some serious beef and not just against individuals, it was the whole demographic! My mate was a thoroughly modern chap and a real nice lad, my best uni mate tbh, he did not partake and apologised profusely, that's the only reason i put up with it, it was small doses when i visited and we both tried to talk them down from it all, reason with them, etc.
My mate was Ghanaian from a fairly run down area of Bolton, and the vitriolic behaviour from his family members was toward the Nigerians on the estate! They had no problem with anyone else but they HATED the Nigerians!
Admittedly I last met his family 10 years ago, but I knew them for 20 before that, they never changed!
My mate was Ghanaian from a fairly run down area of Bolton, and the vitriolic behaviour from his family members was toward the Nigerians on the estate! They had no problem with anyone else but they HATED the Nigerians!
Admittedly I last met his family 10 years ago, but I knew them for 20 before that, they never changed!
JuanCarlosFandango said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Thank you I thought there had been studies and didn't look to find one but that's the kind of thing I was referring to.
In the example Murph replied to the chap would have seen the Muslim sounding name.
Like I said of course I'm not suggesting it's everyone but I'd be interested how those saying "nothing to see here" explain away those sorts of findings?
It's easy to focus on the phrase "institutionally racist as a nation" and proudly declare everything is fine whilst ignoring that the report explicitly points out that overt racism still happens.
Still a lot of work to do.
Perhaps some employers look at the name and think the risk of getting into a wrangle about prayer rooms, types of food available, offensive jokes or something else with someone who can cry racism at any point is not worth the trouble?In the example Murph replied to the chap would have seen the Muslim sounding name.
Like I said of course I'm not suggesting it's everyone but I'd be interested how those saying "nothing to see here" explain away those sorts of findings?
It's easy to focus on the phrase "institutionally racist as a nation" and proudly declare everything is fine whilst ignoring that the report explicitly points out that overt racism still happens.
Still a lot of work to do.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Fair enough so what term would you use for that sort of discrimination?
I'm no grievance nomenclaturist, but I'd probably call it a rational decision in a case where nothing else differentiates 2 candidates but one has a higher risk (however small) of causing serious problems, and is potentially more difficult to get rid of.The perception of the risk is probably greater than the actual risk but I suspect that reasoning is at least as common as out and out 'don't like brown people' racism in reasons for rejecting CVs. Although I'm sure the latter exists to some degree.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff