Positive discriminsation
26 June 2008, 09:10 AM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Positive discriminsation
BBC NEWS | Business | Law 'will ban age discrimination'
Now you all know me as a looney lefty, but I cannot for the life of me see what the government hope to acheive with this meaure other than resentment.
You either have equality, or you don't - Positive discriminsation, is still discrimination. It is choosing one person over another because of thier gender, race or sexuality and it is wrong.
There should be one criteria when choosing between candidtates for employment - Who is best for the job.
Originally Posted by BBC
Under plans to make workplaces more diverse, Ms Harman wants to allow employers to appoint people specifically because of their race or gender.
The proposals would only apply when choosing between candidates equally qualified for the job.
But it means, for example, women or people from minorities could be hired ahead of others in order to create a more balanced workforce.
The proposals would only apply when choosing between candidates equally qualified for the job.
But it means, for example, women or people from minorities could be hired ahead of others in order to create a more balanced workforce.
You either have equality, or you don't - Positive discriminsation, is still discrimination. It is choosing one person over another because of thier gender, race or sexuality and it is wrong.
There should be one criteria when choosing between candidtates for employment - Who is best for the job.
26 June 2008, 09:37 AM
#5
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26 June 2008, 09:46 AM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, people will no longer be promoted on the basis of ability, but rather their sex or ethnic origin.
Will this not make it even more difficult for women and ethnic minorities to get a job in the first place?
Many bosses will be (even more?) reluctant to hire any women or ethnic minorities - unless they are exceptionally good - for fear of having to promote them, even if they are rubbish.
Will this not make it even more difficult for women and ethnic minorities to get a job in the first place?
Many bosses will be (even more?) reluctant to hire any women or ethnic minorities - unless they are exceptionally good - for fear of having to promote them, even if they are rubbish.
26 June 2008, 09:52 AM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A powerslide near you
Posts: 10,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you just put the word "positive" in front of anything and make it alright?
Positive racism.
Positive ageism.
Positive murder.
Positive rape.
Positive nazism.
and so on.
Positive racism.
Positive ageism.
Positive murder.
Positive rape.
Positive nazism.
and so on.
Trending Topics
26 June 2008, 09:56 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC NEWS | Business | Law 'will ban age discrimination'
Now you all know me as a looney lefty, but I cannot for the life of me see what the government hope to acheive with this meaure other than resentment.
You either have equality, or you don't - Positive discriminsation, is still discrimination. It is choosing one person over another because of thier gender, race or sexuality and it is wrong.
There should be one criteria when choosing between candidtates for employment - Who is best for the job.
Now you all know me as a looney lefty, but I cannot for the life of me see what the government hope to acheive with this meaure other than resentment.
You either have equality, or you don't - Positive discriminsation, is still discrimination. It is choosing one person over another because of thier gender, race or sexuality and it is wrong.
There should be one criteria when choosing between candidtates for employment - Who is best for the job.
That hasn't been the case for years, and positive discrimination for race is readily apparent in any institution with ties to or influence from this government (the Police is a prime example of this).
The age angle has its merits, as it is unfortunate that many people over 50, with valuable experience and a good work ethic, find themselves virtually unemployable. Particularly as nowadays employees switch jobs far more frequently than in the good ol' days when the job for life mentality was a reality, so there are no guarantees that whoever you employ will be around longterm anyway.
The race angle is just more insidious political correctness. Who doesn't believe that by saying employers can differentiate between equally competent employees on the basis of race during the recruitment process that what this Government is really doing is applying pressure on employers to recruit more 'ethnic' applicants. Either way, it will certainly keep the legal eagles busy with a predictable increase in the number of cases where employees or new applicants will claim to have failed to get a promotion or be recruited because of their colour.
You might think this Government should have plenty to keep them busy at the moment. Nero and Rome, anyone?
Kevin
26 June 2008, 09:57 AM
#10
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Class record holder at Pembrey Llandow Goodwood MIRA Hethel Blyton Curborough Lydden and Snetterton
Posts: 8,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hang on, everyone is different, so how can any 2 people be 'equally qualified' for the job. One will always be better suited for the role by experience, personality, and other factors that can't be 'qualified'.
I assume this is public sector only?
I assume this is public sector only?
26 June 2008, 10:02 AM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've seen this 1st hand when it came to a round of redundancies. The Asian girl I sat next to was on maternity leave at the time but was due back shortly. She did pretty much bu66er all all day apart from be on the telephone to family when she was at work. She was of no value to the team.
However she didn't get made redundant as she was only 1 of 2 girls in a team of 10 or so, she was 1 of only 2 ethnic minorities in the team and she was on maternity leave. She was number 1 candidate in the team for redundancy based on the fact she did nothing. However she didn't get made redundant and 2 of the hard working members of the team did leaving the team short.
If that isn't 'positive' discrimination I don't know what is.
However she didn't get made redundant as she was only 1 of 2 girls in a team of 10 or so, she was 1 of only 2 ethnic minorities in the team and she was on maternity leave. She was number 1 candidate in the team for redundancy based on the fact she did nothing. However she didn't get made redundant and 2 of the hard working members of the team did leaving the team short.
If that isn't 'positive' discrimination I don't know what is.
26 June 2008, 10:10 AM
#12
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, its universal.
I.e.e it will be legal for anybody to hire on the basis of Race or gender or Age. (so long as that Race or gender or age is a minority in that workplace).
You could argue that the police should have a more representative mix of the racial mix at large.
I don't think you can say that positive age discrimination is "ok" but positive race discriminsation isn't.
Like I say , discrimination is discrimination.
I.e.e it will be legal for anybody to hire on the basis of Race or gender or Age. (so long as that Race or gender or age is a minority in that workplace).
Originally Posted by c_maguire
That hasn't been the case for years, and positive discrimination for race is readily apparent in any institution with ties to or influence from this government (the Police is a prime example of this).
The age angle has its merits, as it is unfortunate that many people over 50, with valuable experience and a good work ethic, find themselves virtually unemployable. Particularly as nowadays employees switch jobs far more frequently than in the good ol' days when the job for life mentality was a reality, so there are no guarantees that whoever you employ will be around longterm anyway.
The race angle is just more insidious political correctness
The age angle has its merits, as it is unfortunate that many people over 50, with valuable experience and a good work ethic, find themselves virtually unemployable. Particularly as nowadays employees switch jobs far more frequently than in the good ol' days when the job for life mentality was a reality, so there are no guarantees that whoever you employ will be around longterm anyway.
The race angle is just more insidious political correctness
I don't think you can say that positive age discrimination is "ok" but positive race discriminsation isn't.
Like I say , discrimination is discrimination.
26 June 2008, 10:37 AM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, its universal.
I.e.e it will be legal for anybody to hire on the basis of Race or gender or Age. (so long as that Race or gender or age is a minority in that workplace).
You could argue that the police should have a more representative mix of the racial mix at large.
Indeed you can, but if you actively encourage unsuitable applicants on the basis of colour as is demonstrated by the fast-tracking of ethnic minorities in certain areas of the country with large ethnic communities, often leap-frogging more competent white colleagues with more time served etc, then this is flawed logic (and dangerous to boot)
I don't think you can say that positive age discrimination is "ok" but positive race discriminsation isn't.
I am not saying positive age discrimination is OK, what I am saying is older people should have a fair crack of the whip where appropriate (I wouldn't hire a 50 year old on a building site, but in an office why not?).
Like I say , discrimination is discrimination.
I.e.e it will be legal for anybody to hire on the basis of Race or gender or Age. (so long as that Race or gender or age is a minority in that workplace).
You could argue that the police should have a more representative mix of the racial mix at large.
Indeed you can, but if you actively encourage unsuitable applicants on the basis of colour as is demonstrated by the fast-tracking of ethnic minorities in certain areas of the country with large ethnic communities, often leap-frogging more competent white colleagues with more time served etc, then this is flawed logic (and dangerous to boot)
I don't think you can say that positive age discrimination is "ok" but positive race discriminsation isn't.
I am not saying positive age discrimination is OK, what I am saying is older people should have a fair crack of the whip where appropriate (I wouldn't hire a 50 year old on a building site, but in an office why not?).
Like I say , discrimination is discrimination.
Kevin
26 June 2008, 10:39 AM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More attempts by Nu Labor to socially engineer society.
When are they going to get the message that we are fed up with the equality and diversity message being rammed down our throats at every given opportunity.
Not until they are drummed finally and humiliatingly from office I suspect.
When are they going to get the message that we are fed up with the equality and diversity message being rammed down our throats at every given opportunity.
Not until they are drummed finally and humiliatingly from office I suspect.
26 June 2008, 10:49 AM
#15
Gender discrimination in favour of women has been here a while.
My eldest lad, three other lads and one girl, got jobs at a local supermarket, let's call them "Wafesay". The jobs were for Christmas.
After Christmas, they were told one could be kept on.
Now my lad had missed ZERO shifts, changed ZERO shifts and worked when told to. he could put out 5 trolley loads of goods per shift.
The girl was constantly changing shifts so as not to have to work Friday or Saturday evenings, had defaulted at least four times, and could put out 2-3 trolley loads per shift.
Have a guess who got the job?
When I was working full-time, a job came up which was promotion for one year. I applied, as did a woman. She was given the job, despite telling the boss she was pregnant and then having 7 months of the job time off with her pregnancy/maternity leave.
And before anyone says it, no I wasn't rubbish!
Alcazar
My eldest lad, three other lads and one girl, got jobs at a local supermarket, let's call them "Wafesay". The jobs were for Christmas.
After Christmas, they were told one could be kept on.
Now my lad had missed ZERO shifts, changed ZERO shifts and worked when told to. he could put out 5 trolley loads of goods per shift.
The girl was constantly changing shifts so as not to have to work Friday or Saturday evenings, had defaulted at least four times, and could put out 2-3 trolley loads per shift.
Have a guess who got the job?
When I was working full-time, a job came up which was promotion for one year. I applied, as did a woman. She was given the job, despite telling the boss she was pregnant and then having 7 months of the job time off with her pregnancy/maternity leave.
And before anyone says it, no I wasn't rubbish!
Alcazar
26 June 2008, 11:03 AM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here, There, Everywhere
Posts: 10,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Potential hassel is not worth it. We're a small company so any unrest can easily affect the whole company.
He also won't hire any female of child baring age.
26 June 2008, 11:24 AM
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
At the same time ... http://news.webindia123.com/news/Art...26/984284.html
"BBC's non-executive director Samir Shah has accused the corporation of rampant ''tokenism'' in their programming saying there are too many ethnic minority faces on TV. The former head of current affairs at the BBC said these programmes created an ''inauthentic representation of who we are''. His comments came after Equalities Minister Harriet Harman announced plans to make it legal for a company to promote a black or female candidate over an equally-qualified white man. Dr Shah said one of the ''odder and plain daft outcomes'' of equal opportunities was over-compensation but genuine problems of discrimination against minorities were not addressed by such tokenism. ''I don't know if there is any systematic data on this but I think we can all agree that there is no shortage of black and Asian reporters and presenters around these days-- especially on news programmes,'' the Daily Mail quoted Dr Shah as saying. He cited research by the Equality and Human Rights Commission which suggested that even ethnic minorities were embarrassed by the ''plethora of brown faces they see on the screen''. ''I don't think that such over-representation is a brilliant idea. True equality is irrelevant what colour you are,'' he added" .
I think his last comment really says it all and should be what legislation is aimed at!
Dave
PS: the article can also be found on UK web sites, though as they were mainly 'Mail-type' sites I thought I'd quote something different to stop comments like 'typical Mail'esque remarks' etc etc
"BBC's non-executive director Samir Shah has accused the corporation of rampant ''tokenism'' in their programming saying there are too many ethnic minority faces on TV. The former head of current affairs at the BBC said these programmes created an ''inauthentic representation of who we are''. His comments came after Equalities Minister Harriet Harman announced plans to make it legal for a company to promote a black or female candidate over an equally-qualified white man. Dr Shah said one of the ''odder and plain daft outcomes'' of equal opportunities was over-compensation but genuine problems of discrimination against minorities were not addressed by such tokenism. ''I don't know if there is any systematic data on this but I think we can all agree that there is no shortage of black and Asian reporters and presenters around these days-- especially on news programmes,'' the Daily Mail quoted Dr Shah as saying. He cited research by the Equality and Human Rights Commission which suggested that even ethnic minorities were embarrassed by the ''plethora of brown faces they see on the screen''. ''I don't think that such over-representation is a brilliant idea. True equality is irrelevant what colour you are,'' he added" .
I think his last comment really says it all and should be what legislation is aimed at!
Dave
PS: the article can also be found on UK web sites, though as they were mainly 'Mail-type' sites I thought I'd quote something different to stop comments like 'typical Mail'esque remarks' etc etc
26 June 2008, 11:32 AM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More attempts by Nu Labor to socially engineer society.
When are they going to get the message that we are fed up with the equality and diversity message being rammed down our throats at every given opportunity.
Not until they are drummed finally and humiliatingly from office I suspect.
When are they going to get the message that we are fed up with the equality and diversity message being rammed down our throats at every given opportunity.
Not until they are drummed finally and humiliatingly from office I suspect.
I agree with every word of Pete Brant's first post of course. It will create nothing but resentment but that is all part of their agenda anyway.
Les
26 June 2008, 11:58 AM
#23
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26 June 2008, 01:14 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wanting the English to come first in England for a change!
Posts: 2,091
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Employing ethnic minorities is a bad idea!
They want twice as many "religious" holidays and if something doesnt go their way, like a pay increase or promotion, they play the race card, "its cos im not white, isnt it!"
Take that tw@ of a copper under that tw@ of a copper ian blair, he is asian. THere were 16 other coppers of the same rank on his "patch". Only 6 got a bonus last year, he was one that didnt, so the first thing he does is play the race card "i wasnt given a bonus cos im asian", So hes given a bonus on the sly to shut him up! Then everyone else finds out and refuse to mix with him at all, in or out of work (quite rightly as well), so he sues the police force for racial discrimination and gets 70 grand!
Next year there is a promotion available to said ranking officers, only one opportunity mind you!
Asian bloke didnt get it, so what does he do, play the ******* race card!
There has to be an enquiry, cos of "human rights", and the outcome is a post was created for him "incase" he sues again!
This causes outrage, and his collegues openly take the pi55 out of him all day, every day! Guess what, he sues the police force and gets compo!
What will he sue for next year, his office not facing mecca!
He is not there to do a job, he is there to get as much out of the police force as possible, using the race card to help him!
This is why i will NEVER employ an "ethnic minority" person!
I say get rid of "rascism" all together, and treat everyomne equal!
If i call you a paki, dont run off crying for compensation for the "hate crime" i comitted, call me a honky and be done with it!
They want twice as many "religious" holidays and if something doesnt go their way, like a pay increase or promotion, they play the race card, "its cos im not white, isnt it!"
Take that tw@ of a copper under that tw@ of a copper ian blair, he is asian. THere were 16 other coppers of the same rank on his "patch". Only 6 got a bonus last year, he was one that didnt, so the first thing he does is play the race card "i wasnt given a bonus cos im asian", So hes given a bonus on the sly to shut him up! Then everyone else finds out and refuse to mix with him at all, in or out of work (quite rightly as well), so he sues the police force for racial discrimination and gets 70 grand!
Next year there is a promotion available to said ranking officers, only one opportunity mind you!
Asian bloke didnt get it, so what does he do, play the ******* race card!
There has to be an enquiry, cos of "human rights", and the outcome is a post was created for him "incase" he sues again!
This causes outrage, and his collegues openly take the pi55 out of him all day, every day! Guess what, he sues the police force and gets compo!
What will he sue for next year, his office not facing mecca!
He is not there to do a job, he is there to get as much out of the police force as possible, using the race card to help him!
This is why i will NEVER employ an "ethnic minority" person!
I say get rid of "rascism" all together, and treat everyomne equal!
If i call you a paki, dont run off crying for compensation for the "hate crime" i comitted, call me a honky and be done with it!
26 June 2008, 01:25 PM
#26
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC NEWS | Business | Law 'will ban age discrimination'
Now you all know me as a looney lefty, but I cannot for the life of me see what the government hope to acheive with this meaure other than resentment.
You either have equality, or you don't - Positive discriminsation, is still discrimination. It is choosing one person over another because of thier gender, race or sexuality and it is wrong.
There should be one criteria when choosing between candidtates for employment - Who is best for the job.
Now you all know me as a looney lefty, but I cannot for the life of me see what the government hope to acheive with this meaure other than resentment.
You either have equality, or you don't - Positive discriminsation, is still discrimination. It is choosing one person over another because of thier gender, race or sexuality and it is wrong.
There should be one criteria when choosing between candidtates for employment - Who is best for the job.
26 June 2008, 01:26 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Warrington
Posts: 4,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will insurers no longer be able to charge a bigger premium to young drivers because it's 'ageist'?
A lot of the examples on the news last night were old folks unable to get travel insurance. I suppose that the actuaries say that the risk is higher for older people and a claim more likely. So surely their premiums will increase and there is no real benefit
A lot of the examples on the news last night were old folks unable to get travel insurance. I suppose that the actuaries say that the risk is higher for older people and a claim more likely. So surely their premiums will increase and there is no real benefit
26 June 2008, 01:39 PM
#30
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=PeteBrant;7965396
Now you all know me as a looney lefty...[/QUOTE]
No, nothing could be further from the truth
Is is plain crazy - best person irrespective of race, sex, colour or religion, no exceptions.
All this will mean is that
a) The person will not know if they where best candidate
b) Nor will the people who work with said person
More PC madness!
Now you all know me as a looney lefty...[/QUOTE]
No, nothing could be further from the truth
BBC NEWS | Business | Law 'will ban age discrimination'
Now you all know me as a looney lefty, but I cannot for the life of me see what the government hope to acheive with this meaure other than resentment.
You either have equality, or you don't - Positive discriminsation, is still discrimination. It is choosing one person over another because of thier gender, race or sexuality and it is wrong.
There should be one criteria when choosing between candidtates for employment - Who is best for the job.
Now you all know me as a looney lefty, but I cannot for the life of me see what the government hope to acheive with this meaure other than resentment.
You either have equality, or you don't - Positive discriminsation, is still discrimination. It is choosing one person over another because of thier gender, race or sexuality and it is wrong.
There should be one criteria when choosing between candidtates for employment - Who is best for the job.
Is is plain crazy - best person irrespective of race, sex, colour or religion, no exceptions.
All this will mean is that
a) The person will not know if they where best candidate
b) Nor will the people who work with said person
More PC madness!