Bonjon Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 He doesn't have to justify himself to you. This isn't a "let's pick Rich apart" thread. No but its a public forum and I can ask whoever I like a question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 He's a Daily Mail reader, they all think that! You're right about that Rich. But it is interesting that while that newspaper like nothing better than to deny wider inequalities and mock those that seek to address those disadvantages; Daily Mail columnists and editorials readily complain about the percieved disadvatages of it's own readership. I don't even know why I'm bothered. It's just a toss rag anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I don't know about you but I feel we would have been at the same stage we are now if there had been no legislation to improve the treatment of minority groups. I feel some of it has actually set the cause back. It's just too ridiculous for words. Women, ethnic groups, the disabled and others would IMO have been just as well off without the government getting involved. Most supposed inequality is just made up by left wing do-gooders who feel the need to patronise minority groups to earn brownie points from their peers. I once worked with a black girl who hated the whole thing. She said she felt "patronised" and "a bit of an idiot" by it all, she didn't want any different treatment, she just wanted them to stop all the nonesence. A good example of how stupid the nation has become, in this example its race, was seen on the One Show, recently. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2006540/Chris-Evans-race-row-saying-black-scientist.html I get annoyed at the sexism legislation, I am sure it is done with good intentions but "women in science" for example makes me feel totally inferior and I will not join in!! If people are sexist/racist etc legislation will just hide that fact. I have seen job applications asking specifically for people from ethnic minorities and applications stating that anyone with a disability that meets the minimum requirements WILL get an interview:loopy: How are they allowed to say that??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 anyone with a disability that meets the minimum requirements WILL get an interview:loopy: How are they allowed to say that??? It's an attempt to get more disabled people through to the interview stage. Is that a bad thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuchi_Zien Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I get annoyed at the sexism legislation, I am sure it is done with good intentions but "women in science" for example makes me feel totally inferior and I will not join in!! If people are sexist/racist etc legislation will just hide that fact. I have seen job applications asking specifically for people from ethnic minorities and applications stating that anyone with a disability that meets the minimum requirements WILL get an interview:loopy: How are they allowed to say that??? The legislation is RESPONSIBLE for sexism/racism?!! Yes, people hide their inate sexism/racism/ignorance because without ther legislation they wouldn't have to. They would be able to turn round and say "I'm not hiring you because you are a black/Muslim/disabled/woman. Are you saying that that would be better. My god! I don't feel comfortable about positive discrimination, it gives all the knuckle draggers an excuse to say "she got the Job because..." rather than on merit, I don't believe in quota's either. If you are looking for peoplewith a specific skill set that no 'minority' has then you shouldn't be forced to hire nobody or hire someone who doesn't have the required skill set. BUT the legislation is there to make companies think about their procedures and how/who/why they employ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordonb Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 It's an attempt to get more disabled people through to the interview stage. Is that a bad thing? It could be. If you have 1 vacancy and 112 applicants you need to lose the bottom 100-105. Therefore you need to look for certain thresholds that your applicants must meet. This probably means you can get it down to say 20 or so. Then you need to lose another 12-15 leaving you with a good number to interview. Why should disabled/black/women etc. jump into this sector if they did not meet your original criteria with regard to the vacancy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted June 22, 2011 Author Share Posted June 22, 2011 You're right about that Rich. But it is interesting that while that newspaper like nothing better than to deny wider inequalities and mock those that seek to address those disadvantages; Daily Mail columnists and editorials readily complain about the percieved disadvatages of it's own readership. I don't even know why I'm bothered. It's just a toss rag anyway. I read the DM but also read other papers, its silly to discriminate against someone just because they read a certain paper. Perhaps there should be legislation introduced. I don't think being gay is any sort of disability, which your victim mentality seems to claim, or that gay people should be protected in law against the issues you state. There is discrimination against all sections of society and gay people should be treated the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Why should disabled/black/women etc. jump into this sector if they did not meet your original criteria with regard to the vacancy? One argument for affirmative action, or positive discrimination in British English, is that a slight relaxation of standards may still find you a good candidate and increase the social range of your workforce. It is good for people to work with different people, so any steps to increase the number of disabled/coloured/female workers is a good thing. I'm in favour of human rights, so I'm drawn towards agreeing with you that everyone should be equal, but sometimes life doesn't work that way. One form of equality legislation that has happened in Britain is for the police in Northern Ireland to recruit people based on religious quotas. They wanted a 50/50 split between the Catholic and Protestant. Is this a bad thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 It's an attempt to get more disabled people through to the interview stage. Is that a bad thing? Why should they get an interview over able bodied people regardless of their ability to do the job. Yes it is a bad thing. As it is there is no indication from the application process that shows the interviewer whether or not a person is disabled so there can be no discrimination on that basis until the interview. This positive discrimination does nothing at all! If the interviewer does not want a disabled person in the post they will decide on someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 The legislation is RESPONSIBLE for sexism/racism?!! Yes, people hide their inate sexism/racism/ignorance because without ther legislation they wouldn't have to. They would be able to turn round and say "I'm not hiring you because you are a black/Muslim/disabled/woman. Are you saying that that would be better. My god! I don't feel comfortable about positive discrimination, it gives all the knuckle draggers an excuse to say "she got the Job because..." rather than on merit, I don't believe in quota's either. If you are looking for peoplewith a specific skill set that no 'minority' has then you shouldn't be forced to hire nobody or hire someone who doesn't have the required skill set. BUT the legislation is there to make companies think about their procedures and how/who/why they employ. Read the post before commenting. I dont know where you got any of that from! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.