Helped friend apply for a job, he was asked "Equality" questions

[MorganX]

our ?   Me typing black was just an example - I was meaning just blacks asking for such,,, just an example.

Your assuming an awful lot

 

No I'm not assuming anything, other than you are human. The statement is a generalized statement referring to humans. Our personal prejudices cloud our vision of reality.

[theyarecomingforyou]

No it makes them feel alienated and it's really none of the employers damn biz.

Of course it's the employer's business. If they have no way of monitoring such criteria then they have no way of knowing whether they're an equal opportunity employer or whether there are inherent biases that need to be addressed. For instance, if the local community is 35% black and yet only 1% of the work force is black then it indicates there might be a problem with the employment practices.

 

The idea is to ensure that everybody has an equal opportunity. Surely you support that?

 

PS - You can't seriously expect me to believe that an OPTIONAL question designed to ensure everybody has an equal opportunity actually makes people feel alienated?

[Noir Angel]

I still maintain that the mere fact that they have to monitor it is stupid in itself. People should be hired for one simple reason: competency.

[Anibal P]

Of course it's the employer's business. If they have no way of monitoring such criteria then they have no way of knowing whether they're an equal opportunity employer or whether there are inherent biases that need to be addressed. For instance, if the local community is 35% black and yet only 1% of the work force is black then it indicates there might be a problem with the employment practices.

 

The idea is to ensure that everybody has an equal opportunity. Surely you support that?

 

PS - You can't seriously expect me to believe that an OPTIONAL question designed to ensure everybody has an equal opportunity actually makes people feel alienated?

 

In the posted example it is NOT optional. making me select a required option is not optional, even if to select "rather not giver", but you wouldn't understand that your type of people NEED to place others in little boxes so you can check off a BS box to make yourselves feel good for being "equal", but you're not, it's still categorizing people by race or color, which is still not needed 

[remixedcat]

 

 

 

Of course it's the employer's business. If they have no way of monitoring such criteria then they have no way of knowing whether they're an equal opportunity employer or whether there are inherent biases that need to be addressed. For instance, if the local community is 35% black and yet only 1% of the work force is black then it indicates there might be a problem with the employment practices.

 

The idea is to ensure that everybody has an equal opportunity. Surely you support that?

 

PS - You can't seriously expect me to believe that an OPTIONAL question designed to ensure everybody has an equal opportunity actually makes people feel alienated?

so you think it;'s ok to alienate people .. ok than...

[theyarecomingforyou]

so you think it;'s ok to alienate people .. ok than...

Non sequitur. I reject the notion that it does alienate people. You also didn't answer my question - do you support equal opportunity? If so you should support forms like this, as they help to facilitate that. If the issue is the manner in which it is achieved I assume you have an alternative proposal to ensure equal opportunity?

[remixedcat]

if you make everyone equal they are... if you make them special they are... simple... how anyone doesn't they are outta thier mind...

[Dick Montage]

You are the most obscurely paranoid person I've seen in a long time.  Either that or you are deliberately trying to find issue with what is a very common form, a very common practice, and moreover one that has an opt out clause of "Rather not say".

[T3X4S]

Of course it's the employer's business. If they have no way of monitoring such criteria then they have no way of knowing whether they're an equal opportunity employer or whether there are inherent biases that need to be addressed. For instance, if the local community is 35% black and yet only 1% of the work force is black then it indicates there might be a problem with the employment practices.

 

The idea is to ensure that everybody has an equal opportunity. Surely you support that?

 

PS - You can't seriously expect me to believe that an OPTIONAL question designed to ensure everybody has an equal opportunity actually makes people feel alienated?

What if the company in your example doesnt give a crap what the local community is comprised of ?  What if they ONLY look @ who is best for the job ?  What if they are in "da hood" but are a gov't thinktank specializing in next gen applications for atomic-based GPS ? 

You're assuming a non-diverse staff is a negative.

The company I work for is pretty diverse in ethnicity, but everyone is alike in terms of backgrounds.

Middle eastern, black, white, and asian - pretty diverse.  But people in my department, and my team specifically are alike in backgrounds:

engineers, math majors, techies (computer science) = nerds... then there is me... I just tell them "Im here to liven it up a little."

[remixedcat]

TBH I'm a mix of islander and european, guess what I pick....

 

 

 

 

 

PREFER NOT TO SAY! y'kno why??? nunyah!

 

and that's how it should be

[theyarecomingforyou]

What if the company in your example doesnt give a crap what the local community is comprised of ?  What if they ONLY look @ who is best for the job ?  What if they are in "da hood" but are a gov't thinktank specializing in next gen applications for atomic-based GPS ? 

You're assuming a non-diverse staff is a negative.

I never made such an assumption. I simply pointed out that a workplace lacking diversity might indicate there is a problem with recruitment; it could just as easily relate to failures in the education system or different cultures. The point is that there is no problem with collecting such information. Most employers aren't as specialised as yours and that's where equality legislation is especially important.

 

if you make everyone equal they are... if you make them special they are... simple... how anyone doesn't they are outta thier mind...

I have no idea what you're trying to say. That was gibberish to me.

[FloatingFatMan]

The idea is to ensure that everybody has an equal opportunity. Surely you support that?

 

PS - You can't seriously expect me to believe that an OPTIONAL question designed to ensure everybody has an equal opportunity actually makes people feel alienated?

 

This is more likely to be just another excuse to play the racism card; even though it's at something designed to try to cut down on the racism in work issue... For some people, any excuse will do.

[Tomo]

Equality questions just puts pressure on employers to make sure they have a balance of genders, races, sexual orientations rather than being able to employ someone for being the right person to do the job. I don't think it's fair that someone would get the job over me because they fit a certain equality criteria if I was more suited to the job in question.

[Dick Montage]

Equality questions just puts pressure on employers to make sure they have a balance of genders, races, sexual orientations rather than being able to employ someone for being the right person to do the job.

 

 

NO

 

No, they do not.  They are for statistics purposes, for monitoring, it is NOT part of the decision making process.

 

How many times does this need to be explained before it sinks through people's paranoia and xenophobia.

PREFER NOT TO SAY! y'kno why??? nunyah!

 

 

Which means you are given the opt-out.  As such, you are arguing a very moot point.  Wow...

 

BUT, it IS their business.  If you work for them, they are legally entitled to ask.  Dislike it?  Bye

[Tomo]

NO

 

No, they do not.  They are for statistics purposes, for monitoring, it is NOT part of the decision making process.

 

How many times does this need to be explained before it sinks through people's paranoia and xenophobia.

 

There is a real fear of making sure you don't fall foul of expectations when it comes to diversity in the workplace. I have seen a number of cases where companies have been accused of not doing enough to employ women/black/gay people however what these 'accusers' don't take into account is the fact that maybe the right people for these jobs weren't women/black/gay? Maybe in that area there is a high number of the people of a similar race that are more suitable.

 

I know that these statistics are used for monitoring purposes however certain people/groups can and do use these figures to put pressure on companies.

[Dick Montage]

There is a real fear of making sure you don't fall foul of expectations when it comes to diversity in the workplace. I have seen a number of cases where companies have been accused of not doing enough to employ women/black/gay people however what these 'accusers' don't take into account is the fact that maybe the right people for these jobs weren't women/black/gay? Maybe in that area there is a high number of the people of a similar race that are more suitable.

 

I know that these statistics are used for monitoring purposes however certain people/groups can and do use these figures to put pressure on companies.

 

 

There is a fear of it, stirred up by tabloid xenophobia.  Also misinterpretation of what is done plays a part - given two equal candidates, will I employ one who communicates better with the team, hell yeah!

 

"what these 'accusers' don't take into account is the fact that maybe the right people for these jobs weren't women/black/gay" Spot on.  Playing victim is part of the issue also.

 

Pressure groups do try to use these stats, but they are not taken for the purpose of decision making.

[McKay]

Just write that your a black, trans disabled lesbian and they can't say otherwise or they're oppressing you.

[Tomo]

 

Pressure groups do try to use these stats, but they are not taken for the purpose of decision making.

 

That's right, they aren't but they can indirectly affect the decision if the employer feels under pressure to maintain equality.

[Dick Montage]

That's right, they aren't but they can indirectly affect the decision if the employer feels under pressure to maintain equality.

 

As can a great many things - moot point.  No such pressure should exist, else equality is a myth.

[Tomo]

As can a great many things - moot point.  No such pressure should exist, else equality is a myth.

So you're prepared to dismiss anything that you don't agree with as a 'moot point'.

 

Equality could quite possibly be a myth, who knows? It's certainly not where it should be.

[Ralph3100]

NO

 

No, they do not.  They are for statistics purposes, for monitoring, it is NOT part of the decision making process.

 

How many times does this need to be explained before it sinks through people's paranoia and xenophobia.

Probably as long as it take for us to stop hearing hiring managers ask whether or not the person we recommended, who looks good on paper, would be "diverse" enough. This isn't paranoia. This is experience. You can say all you want that it isn't a part of the decision making process, but corporations are so concerned with even having the slightest appearance of discrimination from fear of being sued.

[Dick Montage]

Probably as long as it take for us to stop hearing hiring managers ask whether or not the person we recommended, who looks good on paper, would be "diverse" enough. This isn't paranoia. This is experience. You can say all you want that it isn't a part of the decision making process, but corporations are so concerned with even having the slightest appearance of discrimination from fear of being sued.

 

Sorry, but no HR department in the right mind would do that.  No manager worth his salt would do that.  If you have first hand experience then you are working in the wrong place - otherwise hyperbole and fear!

[Alera]

Having worked for the Job Centre in the recent past, I can tell you that no, you are not forced to do the questionnaire at all nor are you forced to give any meaningful answers to it either.

 

I should add that it has no bearing on future applications and is simply there to collect data on who uses the service.

[Bryan R.]

Sorry, but no HR department in the right mind would do that.  No manager worth his salt would do that.  If you have first hand experience then you are working in the wrong place - otherwise hyperbole and fear!

Honestly though, many managers aren't worth their salt and many business owners are scum. You sure sound like you have your head on straight but be honest about everyone else. There are racists in managerial roles as well.

[Dick Montage]

Honestly though, many managers aren't worth their salt and many business owners are scum. You sure sound like you have your head on straight but be honest about everyone else. There are racists in managerial roles as well.

 

I would say historically yes, or maybe I work in a culture where it would be stamped out instantly.