621–630 of 724 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Friends" here means members of the National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation Employees.
... You concede that it was cronyism here. Unless you want to expand on what you are saying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just for clarity, this was for a publicly posted job position, so non-target candidates were able to, and did, put in applications. They were assessed the same way target candidates were. Try again.
> In our case, the recruitment team started by only headhunting target candidates. Once we exhausted that pool, they would headhunt any candidate. "Target candidate" = those in minority groups, yes?
> You're assuming there is no genetic component whatsoever to human skills and interests, and the only reason women are not studying computer science/car repair/welding is sexism.
Your outrage against our hiring practice is 100% performative. So no, I'm not going to engage with you any further.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> better social service we should just drop means testing of services > extra resources for schools in poor areas more funding != better outcomes. Parental involvement is what drives outcomes. If you don't have parents around, nothing matters.
Extra resources for schools = free breakfast, lunch, afterschool activities = kids cost less money = parents can work less demanding/normal hour jobs = more parental involvement. That’s a lot of logic, but resources for schools is a lot more than free food, better books, etc. schools are one of the best ways to distribute community resources. The alternative (read: kids who got expelled from normal schools) near me h…
Here's a comparison of school meals in Korea vs. the US. There are similar comparisons with Japan, France, and Germany. Somehow the US is uniquely unable to feed kids healthy food. I blame political corruption and food industry marketing.
https://www.allkpop.com/buzz/2024/04/what-are-they-feeding-t...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/foodnews/how-french-s...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or you stop trying to force blacks into the job and hire whoever applies and is the most qualified. This way people don't die just so leftists can feel satisfied.
Which part of setting up a stall in a job fair in a more diverse part of town is "forcing blacks into the job"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That depends: Are you underpaying them? The question, "why" matters here a lot. "I tend to prefer minorities because I can underpay and get away with more" is a thing that exists in the real world. See: Immigrant farm workers and H1B visa holders. Is that discrimination against white/majorities or is it a kind of discrimination against minorities? It's injustice, for sure but I point it out because DEI policies, disc…
Using race as a metric in your hiring decisions, for any reason at all, is illegal. You simply cannot do it. Not as a tie breaking point, not a plus factor-- nothing at all. The law is crystal clear on this: https://x.com/andrealucasEEOC/status/1752006517761421719?t=v...
And no one is going to care if some farmer won’t hire white people for his farm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Maybe we can acknowledge that there is a real problem that people were responding to. I am not seeped in all the cases you mention here. You have not drawn a picture for me though to see that all of these are the same issue and that should all be treated the same way rather than be dealt with individually.
Add to that the effort to repeal California’s ban on affirmative action: https://newsroom.ucla.edu/stories/prop-16-failed-in-californ... It’s all the same issue and has been since the 1970s. Many people believe you need explicit racial references in hiring, government programs. This is a deeply unpopular idea, so it gets hidden behind various labels. Though there was a “masks off” moment starting in 2020 when people…
I draw a line between "need explicit racial references in hiring" and the "biographical questionnaire" in the article. The later was explicit deception, what I want to call fraud though maybe dose not fit the technical definition, and was correctly labeled cheating since the answers were apparently handed out. I can not lump all this activities together and label it as one thing at least due to the line I drew above and likely other lines I would draw as digging in to more details.
> Though there was a “masks off” moment starting in 2020 when people were openly subscribing to Ibram Kendi thought (who lays out his view clearly that the only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination).
I think you are simplifying too much here. The way this reads is that everyone on the other side of the issue to you is either masks off and is like Ibram Kendi, or is masks on and hiding it how they are like Ibram Kendi.
I do not buy it is that simple, the world is more complex than that with people that have a wide variety of motivations and goals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
its actually a personality test, that ideally should be designed to be well-suited to filter out personality types that tend to be successful at the job. The scandal was coaching people how to pass the personality test. That's just a waste. You end up getting people who are a bad fit for the job, and will ultimately not be successful long-term For instance, I will ace any aptitude test at 99.9%+ percentile easily (I…
Personality tests being useful makes sense, but personality tests where candidates are sparse and the training/hiring bottleneck has already been passed by candidates is terrible. Also, I have a very hard time believing these "correct" answers are representative of the already hired candidates. Worst subject in school was science, worst in college was history, and participated in four or more high school sports, but…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I simply responded to the above comment saying eliminating the privilege of white people is a dogwhistle for being racist against white people. It's not. I said nothing about the post, and don't know why you're bringing it up. Please try to keep context in mind so you don't make halfbaked statements.
It’s not? How non-racist of you (and non-presumptuous) to “eliminate someone’s privilege” based solely on the color of their skin. You do know there are poor and disadvantaged white people too, right? You might even be surprised that they outnumber black people. And shame on you for even thinking you have the right to make such a call, or even entertain such a notion. Talk about privilege.