New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity • Hacker News Board

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#491

Post by jimmygrapes » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:01 PM UTC

tstrimple wrote: post #480

dbrueck wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Applying those labels to people who are objectively and overtly acting that way is not the problem. The problem is that way too often people are assuming it's there. It's a presumption of intent, "racism is one possible explanation for your viewpoint, therefore I somehow /just know/ that you are a racist person". Example: every recent white-cop-shot-a-black-person incident in the U.S. Not only is there widespread ass…

I think you're missing the point w.r.t. BLM and racist policing. The assumption isn't racism. The statistical evidence says racism. And the argument was never that all of these white cops are independently racist in their heart of hearts. It's that they participate in and support a system with explicitly racist outcomes. There is simply no question that the criminal justice system in the US has racist outcomes. https…

Are there not many potential explanations other than a nebulous concept of "racism" for these statistics?

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#492

Post by jbeam » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:01 PM UTC

jb775 wrote: post #156

livinginfear wrote: post #80

I consider myself a very politically informed person. I'm not a politically active person however, largely for the reasons mentioned in the article. I considered myself a liberal by the standards of the time I grew up in. My views on some social issues, particularly 'free speech', are considered a conservative now. I am one of the people the article is concerning who will not publicly voice their political opinions i…

> how willingly other people bring up politically sensitive issues in the workplace I'd say I'm a mix of conservative/Libertarian and this kind of blows my mind over the past few years. It seems like I constantly hear people on the left openly voicing their political opinions around crowds of people, and always speak in a way that they genuinely believe everyone around them agrees....and often have a condescending wa…

> Conservative policies take a bit more explaining to get their point across, and are much more focused on the logical and realistic side of things.

>...

>Also, the time horizon for conservative viewpoints is often much longer (think about generations in the future and the impact today's decisions will have down the road).

Conservative policy in the US toward climate change right now is "it's a worldwide scientific hoax designed to take down the United States economy." That is not logical or reasonable. It expressly ignores the needs of future generations. Give me oil and economic growth now, externalities be damned.

>"everyone should have world class health care!"

The United States is the about the only western country for which the right-wing views this as illogical and unrealistic. Why? Maybe it is because sick people sometimes have trouble keeping a job, and

>"someone who doesn't work and doesn't contribute to society doesn't deserve govt handouts"

Is that it?

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#493

Post by mensetmanusman » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:02 PM UTC

pasabagi wrote: post #479

hilbert42 wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"However, I fear the repercussions of offending others who do not have an open mind." You're dead right and it's damned terrible. I long for both formal and informal debates on many topics but without my opponents becoming annoyed or offended (as so often they do nowadays). These days it seems almost impossible to debate any subject without upsetting someone. I now long for the type of television programs that I reme…

As a sort of counterpoint, I think it might be worth it to watch a classic of the 'free debate' genre, Buckley vs Baldwin[1], that happened in the sixties in Cambridge. It pitted a black civil rights activist against the young Buckley, later a stalwart of American conservatism. I don't know if it's my bias speaking, but I felt that in the debate, Buckley comes across as a bully, with very little argumentative meat, w…

Instead of agitating for exclusion, agitate for more inclusion, e.g. demand both.

People living lives of ‘or’ forget that ‘and’ exists.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#494

Post by Ironlikebike » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:05 PM UTC

Tycho wrote: post #310

livinginfear wrote: post #80

I consider myself a very politically informed person. I'm not a politically active person however, largely for the reasons mentioned in the article. I considered myself a liberal by the standards of the time I grew up in. My views on some social issues, particularly 'free speech', are considered a conservative now. I am one of the people the article is concerning who will not publicly voice their political opinions i…

Lot of advice floating about the workplace these days along the lines of be candid, join the conversation, bring your whole self to work, etc. The people giving this advice seem to have no conception that not everyone actively engaged in these topics is acting in 100% good faith. Being too open could so easily backfire. Encouraging this is borderline negligent. Indeed there’s entire branches of activism that rest on…

"Being too open could so easily backfire."

I'm in the market for a new leadership role and I have a very well established leadership model that I've honed over the years to build high performing organizations. I was considering publishing my leadership writings (that I share with my employees when I coach them) on my LinkedIn so prospective employers could see whether I'm a good fit for transforming their organizations.

One of my former employees cautioned me that my since my leadership model doesn't virtue signal that I might find it hurts me more than it helps my prospects. I'm not sure what to make of this.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#495

Post by f1refly » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:05 PM UTC

amalcon wrote: post #337

Underqualified wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I read recently which seemed weird at first but has made me really consider a lot of things about current culture differently: "Taking offence is an act of aggression"

I don't mean to pick on you a bit here, but this feels like a good place to express something I've been having trouble with. My parents raised me to do my best to neither take nor give offense. Most of my peers as a child were taught the same way. Obviously we're not Vulcans; We will sometimes inadvertently give offense, or respond emotionally to something that may have been meant innocuously. Yet so much of what I s…

I think it just looks like this, mostly becuase of twitter. I've never seen anyone in real live interpret a statement in the most offensive way imaginable and not accept correction nor explanation. The chilling effect is undeniably though.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#496

Post by giantg2 » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:08 PM UTC

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #484

giantg2 wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the main issue was with the "expectation" part. It carries an insinuation of being forced, or socially shunned, etc. There are choices being made, and choices aren't random. I don't really see expectations that a woman take a lower paying job playing into that very much. I can see more pressure on the other side - like for the man to pay for everything on dates, support their family, etc, with the resulting l…

I'm assume you're male because you're coming at it from that perspective. Do you believe there is no pressure when you're one of the few women in an engineering course? There's a lot at play here, and focusing on your slice may prevent you from seeing the whole.

I can see pressure if the woman (or any first-of) is one of the first in their role/job to do well and represent their subgroup. This of course implies that there is a stereotype to overcome, which I see as a very small minority sentiment today. I didn't notice any stereotyping related to women in my classes. Also, in my masters courses the gender mix was probably 60% male 40% female.

There is a lot at play, and there is plenty of variation by location and other factors.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#497

Post by Krisando » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:08 PM UTC

dbrueck wrote: post #413

tstrimple wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why everyone keeps scoffing at the idea of calling some of these folks Nazis or racists. It's not hyperbole or an exaggeration. We did have a rally with a bunch of white nationalists exercising their "free speech" to chant "The Jews will not replace us" and they ended up murdering someone there. We had a National Security Advisor to the President of the United States promoting replacement theory. There a…

Applying those labels to people who are objectively and overtly acting that way is not the problem. The problem is that way too often people are assuming it's there. It's a presumption of intent, "racism is one possible explanation for your viewpoint, therefore I somehow /just know/ that you are a racist person". Example: every recent white-cop-shot-a-black-person incident in the U.S. Not only is there widespread ass…

> every recent white-cop-shot-a-black-person incident in the U.S. Not only is there widespread assumption of racism being the motivation (despite little or no evidence of that), you can't even /talk/ about parts of the problem without being labeled a racist.

What I thought was even more interesting was that racism was never a charge raised in the George Floyd case yet it was one parroted by many individuals as completely 'obvious' guilt in.

The discussion that happens outside of these circles seems to be entirely different approach too and I would dare not even mention facts like this among work colleagues, even though he is plainly guilty of other charges as it does not fit the narrative they hold.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#498

Post by Const-me » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:08 PM UTC

Loughla wrote: post #459

giantg2 wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is basically my point. If you have a srated goal of getting to 1.00 v 1.00 with that metric and focus on the individuals in the same jobs, then you will never get there. It's a mismatch between policy and intent. Using the goal post analogy, there taking their shots at the sideline without realizing where the goal really is. The posts haven't moved, they just see a mirage in another place. "...points to a theory…

I'm afraid you've missed my point. Obviously no one is forcing individual people into one career or another. Never in my life has someone held a gun to my head and said, "pick a job in education, because I say so." But, society as a whole, places expectations on some groups, but not others. Whether those expectations are to be the caregiver or big tough man who provides for the family. Therefore, career choice, and t…

> and can be controlled by unfair external factors

Are you sure about that?

In Sweden, society is very gender-equal: they have paternity leave, very small paygap, about 50% of women in leadership position. Yet only 13% of Swedish engineers are women.

I think if you eliminate all the external factors you’re talking about, you still won’t get anywhere close to 50% of female engineers, or 50% of male pediatricians, as long as people are free to choose a profession.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#499

Post by spangry » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:10 PM UTC

InvertedRhodium wrote: post #448

spangry wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The refined point (and all preceding points) are not based in any sort of actionable public policy. I would argue that that point is as much based in emotion as the leftist points the parent is talking about. Yes, it sounds good that in a fair society people should not be entitled to the fruits of someone else's work, except if they cannot work themselves. It sounds good to people of both sides. I would not label t…

The mutual obligation requirement in Australia might not be the best example, with at least 2 issues: 1. It's, in part, a thinly veiled program to transfer public money into the pockets of privately owned "Employment Service Providers" 2. It's offloading the "checking" to other private companies by way of requiring people to apply for a certain number of jobs. Any jobs. Maybe the same jobs you've been rejected for ag…

I agree it's far from perfect.

The whole employment services provider model is a weird frankenstein pseudo-market which operates according to bureaucratic rules and artificial 'prices'. And this model requires the bureaucracy to monitor the pseudo-bureaucracy (employment service providers) to ensure they're delivering employment services appropriately. The thinking behind this model is similar to arguments made in favour of privatisation - that private firms will always be more efficient than direct government service provision.

Lots of policy trade-offs to consider: Should government directly provide employment services or is a pseudo-private market more efficient? Should we just drop mutual obligation entirely at the cost of potentially higher structural and hardcore unemployment (and so higher government outlays on transfer payments)?

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#500

Post by thrwyoilarticle » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 2:10 PM UTC

vixen99 wrote: post #458

thrwyoilarticle wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you hire women, you're acting politically. And if you don't hire women, you're acting politically. Pretending that you're not political is the comfort of being in a position where those politics don't effect you.

No, you choose to interpret it as such. Maybe it was only women who applied or a man would be utterly useless in the job for physical reasons or . . . Of course you can put a gloss on anything someone says but that doesn't mean it's necessarily a substantive contribution to the actual circumstances which apply for that time and place.

Women were banned from being priests in the Church of England before 1994. The same Church of England sends 26 bishops - until 2015, all men - to sit in the house of Lords.

Personally I have worked in a small company where the owner wouldn't have hired a woman regardless of ability.