Opinion Diversity in hiring - Should we hire based on skin color, sexual preference, disability status - or the content of someone's character?

[fedorthegoat777]

Should we follow the words of the great MLKJ: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Was the great MLKJr a little outdated and behind his times? Is this now a racist policy? It seems many corporations are rushing to hire people based on their skin color, sexual preference, or disability status.

Has the pendulum swung too far in the other direction? Wouldn't judging and hiring people simply based on the content of their character be best for corporations and America? Doesn't the NBA already do this?

Are programs like Affirmative action & DEI helping or hurting corporations & America?

 

[rearnakedchoke]

DEI creates an environment where everyone who meets the needs of the job is looked at. People who are complaining about this have probably been given preferential treatment at some point. They see the firm grasp on where their privilege has got them and have to lie about what the programs are about.


Elon crying hard about this is actually really funny. If he has never hired family members or friends or even been hired by family or friends, he is a hypocrite.

 

[Mr Holmes]

DEI creates an environment where everyone who meets the needs of the job is looked at.

You're describing equality. Equity is something different.

 

[Rob Battisti]

DEI creates an environment where everyone who meets the needs of the job is looked at. People who are complaining about this have probably been given preferential treatment at some point. They see the firm grasp on where their privilege has got them and have to lie about what the programs are about.


Elon crying hard about this is actually really funny. If he has never hired family members or friends or even been hired by family or friends, he is a hypocrite.

Yeah, no.

What you’re describing is EEO which is a legal basis for ensuring no adverse hiring practices.

 

[rearnakedchoke]

You're describing equality. Equity is something different.

Not really. Delta having a DEI program doesn’t mean they are gonna hire a bus driver for a pilot job. The anti DEI group are scared seeing their privilege slipping from their grasps. So disinformation is their only shot.

 

[rearnakedchoke]

Yeah, no.

What you’re describing is EEO which is a legal basis for ensuring no adverse hiring practices.

Maybe the example. But the Dei programs are more than just that. It’s a great way to train leaders on many things from biases, micro aggressions, hiring equity. The people who make it all about undeserving candidates getting jobs thet get are being disingenuous.

 

[Mr Holmes]

Not really. Delta having a DEI program doesn’t mean they are gonna hire a bus driver for a pilot job. The anti DEI group are scared seeing their privilege slipping from their grasps. So disinformation is their only shot.

So what the difference between equity and equality then?

 

[rearnakedchoke]

So what the difference between equity and equality then?

I know the difference. The equity part doesn’t just refer to the hiring process, but the entire employment process. Knowing your workforce and providing people with certain needs the resources to make them a better employee is just good business.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

DEI = Racism, Sexism, etc

Whomever is most qualified for a position should get the job. Period.

You're either in favor of meritocracy, or you're in favor of jobs being denied based on their sex, race, sexuality, etc.

There's no middleground.

 

[Mr Holmes]

I know the difference. The equity part doesn’t just refer to the hiring process, but the entire employment process. Knowing your workforce and providing people with certain needs the resources to make them a better employee is just good business.

Sounds like preferential treatment based on assumed traits and experiences. That's different from what you posted above.

 

[rearnakedchoke]

Sounds like preferential treatment based on assumed traits and experiences. That's different from what you posted above.

Not really. But I can understand the disconnect you are seeing from my posts. During the hiring process, creating a diverse pool of candidates is important. Providing a diverse interview team is just as important. During employment, equity and inclusion ensures the selected candidate is provided with the best tools they need to succeed, thus making it a great business decision.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

The evolution from MLK to today is just the natural evolution we see when any group becomes more powerful. 20 years ago it was 'please Britain, please let us seek refuge in your beautiful country!' Now it's 'Sharia for UK, convert or die!'

When European jews first started migrating to Palestine, they were meek and mild, just looking for a home, until they built up a critical mass, then it was apaetheid/genocide time.

European settlers in the New World first looked to work together with the natives, until they had enough of a foothold to conquer them.

That's just how it works.

Everyone looks at the past to say 'look how bad these guys were' but what they're really just pointing to is how dominant cultures subjugate the weaker cultures around them. Everyone does it.

All these cultures had a chance to save themselves but they were too apathetic.

 

[Mr Holmes]

Not really. But I can understand the disconnect you are seeing from my posts. During the hiring process, creating a diverse pool of candidates is important. Providing a diverse interview team is just as important. During employment, equity and inclusion ensures the selected candidate is provided with the best tools they need to succeed, thus making it a great business decision.

Are aware of diversity goals that many companies have? If so, how do those goals not lead to preferential bias in the hiring process?

 

[I Am Legion]

My line of work does not attract a diverse talent pool. To combat that, the company will do "diversity hires". People of color or females will get jobs over more qualified people. In all my years I have never seen it work out. We call then 6 monthers. They get overwhelmed and quit in 6 months. You need to hire the best person for the job, regardless of the demographic of the workforce. The NBA isn't hiring more white players because the league is 75% black. They don't get more Asians or Hispanics so the league can be more diverse.That does not mean steps need to be taken to make sure there is a fair interview process. The company should not block people from interviews due to race or gender. But they need to hire based on qualifications and skills alone.

 

[rearnakedchoke]

Are aware of diversity goals that many companies have? If so, how do those goals not lead to preferential bias in the hiring process?

I’m aware of them. I think those goals are set based on the make up of the region they are in. If you have a properly run company, the workforce should in most cases
Closely resemble the area and your customer base.

 

[I Am Legion]

Not really. But I can understand the disconnect you are seeing from my posts. During the hiring process, creating a diverse pool of candidates is important. Providing a diverse interview team is just as important. During employment, equity and inclusion ensures the selected candidate is provided with the best tools they need to succeed, thus making it a great business decision.

I agree with he first part. I am all for a diverse pool of candidates. The second part however, is bullshit. If you hire the right candidate, they do not need any different "tools" to succeed than any other team member has. A company's job is to hire the best people to make them successful. It is not a private company's job to make a diversity hire and then give them preferential attention so they can succeed. If you have 50 candidates, you hire the best one in terms of qualifications and skill sets, and experience.

 

[oldshadow]

EEO- making sure the pool of candidates is large enough to include all best possible for the position. Then choosing the best candidate no matter the race or sex.

DEI- choosing a candidate based on sex or race as the major factor. Thereby excluding others based on their race or sex.

DEI was was started as the wrong answer to the lack of the best candidates of all sexs and races being large enough. In other words since we don't get the results we wanted with quality we are not going to work to improve the quality. We are going to skip the quality and get the results we want through discrimination.

 

[Rob Battisti]

Maybe the example. But the Dei programs are more than just that. It’s a great way to train leaders on many things from biases, micro aggressions, hiring equity. The people who make it all about undeserving candidates getting jobs thet get are being disingenuous.

What is hiring equity to you?

This is literally my profession so I’m curious.

 

[Mr Holmes]

I’m aware of them. I think those goals are set based on the make up of the region they are in. If you have a properly run company, the workforce should in most cases
Closely resemble the area and your customer base.

I want to make sure I understand your position correctly. You're saying biases can exist in equity hiring, but its okay because we need to undo previous bad hiring. Did I get it correctly?

I would fundamentally disagree with this approach. I work in tech for example. In college it was normal to have a lecture hall full of asian and white men. There was maybe 1 or 2 women or black students. Its pretty obvious why setting demographic targets with a lop sided talent pool is a bad idea.

 

[jeff7b9]

How about their ability to do the fucking job?