PDA

View Full Version : positive discrimination and workplace diversity (sf atheism ad thread)



TheJoker
10-12-2008, 04:52 PM
I often see job advertisements saying "Aboriginals and Torres Straight Islanders encouraged to apply" or "women are encouraged to apply". Have not seen one ad saying "men are encouraged to apply" or "white anglo-saxons are encouraged to apply".

Perhaps they "men and anglo-saxons" do not need any ecouragement.

The business may be seeking to increase its workforce diversity in an attempt to leverage the competitive advantage properly managed workforce diversity can provide.

I have often seen ads that say an MBA is desireable. I have yet to see an ad that says a primary school education is desireable.

There is no need specifiy something in recruitment advertisement that is likely to be in abundance in the vast majority of applicants.

The real question is how to determine whether the discrimination (selection criteria) is justified or not. Now that's a tricky business.

Capablanca-Fan
10-12-2008, 11:44 PM
Perhaps they "men and anglo-saxons" do not need any ecouragement.
Stop stereotyping. Plenty of them need encouragement. Even more now, since so many in the educracy and media are ranting about how evil Anglo-Saxon men are (ignoring their contributions to art, science and the abolition of slavery (http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/4932/)).


The business may be seeking to increase its workforce diversity in an attempt to leverage the competitive advantage properly managed workforce diversity can provide.
No way. They wouldn't need government bureaucrats to tell them if so. Indeed, the free market is the best treatment for discrimination (http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4457), but the Anointed (http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=484)don't like giving ordinary people choices.


The real question is how to determine whether the discrimination (selection criteria) is justified or not. Now that's a tricky business.
No, it's easy: let the businesses decide without government bureaucrats shaking them down for "discrimination" on the flimsy grounds of numbers of employees. In fact, it's none of the government's business who a private business employs.

TheJoker
11-12-2008, 12:01 AM
...the educracy and media are ranting... No way. They wouldn't need government bureaucrats to tell them... the Anointed don't like giving ordinary people choices.... let the businesses decide without government bureaucrats shaking them down....it's none of the government's....

Get a grip Jono nobody mentioned government once, your paranoia is taking hold yet again.:eek:

Re-read my post. It was written from a business perspective and at no time was I thinking about government.

If as a director I want a woman on my board to get some diversity (to eliminate group think etc) I might well state in my advertisement "woman are encouraged to apply". Naturally I wouldn't need to write "men are encouraged to apply" if prior experience told me that the majority of applicants are likley to be males.

TheJoker
11-12-2008, 12:08 AM
No way. They wouldn't need government bureaucrats to tell them if so.

They dont need governments to tell them. Businesses now widely recognise the major benefits that a diverse workforce can bring about, try checking out the diversity policies of leading organisations such as Google.

CameronD
11-12-2008, 12:09 AM
Get a grip Jono nobody mentioned government once, your paranoia is taking hold yet again.:eek:

Re-read my post. It was written from a business perspective and at no time was I thinking about government.

If as a director I want a woman on my board to get some diversity (to eliminate group think etc) I might well state in my advertisement "woman are encouraged to apply". Naturally I wouldn't need to write "men are encouraged to apply" if prior experience told me that the majority of applicants are likley to be males.

I'm not sure about the men are encourage to apply bit. I think the Law has exemptions for pro-woman policies for work place discrimation, but not for men.

Though I fear this will probably be the future.

http://www.christian.org.uk/news/20080212/47000-fine-for-bishop-sued-by-homosexual-youth-worker/

Capablanca-Fan
11-12-2008, 12:25 AM
I'm not sure about the men are encourage to apply bit. I think the Law has exemptions for pro-woman policies for work place discrimation, but not for men.
Precisely.


Though I fear this will probably be the future.

http://www.christian.org.uk/news/20080212/47000-fine-for-bishop-sued-by-homosexual-youth-worker/
Ah yes, the Gay-stapo is very active in the UK as well as Canada.

TheJoker
11-12-2008, 12:25 AM
I'm not sure about the men are encourage to apply bit. I think the Law has exemptions for pro-woman policies for work place discrimation, but not for men.

I know of no such exemptions in NSW, the only exemption I am aware of is that the role has a genuine requirement for a particular sex (man or woman). Or that if a woman is pregnant it is acceptable not ot offer her a job.

Capablanca-Fan
11-12-2008, 12:31 AM
Get a grip Jono nobody mentioned government once, your paranoia is taking hold yet again.:eek:
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that the government really isn't trying to control more and more of our lives :P


If as a director I want a woman on my board to get some diversity (to eliminate group think etc)
Talk about stereotyping!


I might well state in my advertisement "woman are encouraged to apply".
If you were such a director and I held shares, I would vote to fire you. A decent director with the shareholders interests at heart would want the best person for the job, not a woman for some "diversity".

University diversity is a fraud: it means a white leftist, female leftist, black leftist and gay leftist—i.e. political and intellectual diversity is the last thing they want. It's doubtful that it means much different with "corporate social responsibility" claptrap.

TheJoker
11-12-2008, 01:22 AM
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that the government really isn't trying to control more and more of our lives :P


Talk about stereotyping!


If you were such a director and I held shares, I would vote to fire you. A decent director with the shareholders interests at heart would want the best person for the job, not a woman for some "diversity".

University diversity is a fraud: it means a white leftist, female leftist, black leftist and gay leftist—i.e. political and intellectual diversity is the last thing they want. It's doubtful that it means much different with "corporate social responsibility" claptrap.

You obviously no nothing about modern business practices and research and you are obviously not willing to learn. I'll just take comfort in the fact that modern business leaders (at least sucessful ones do recognise the benefits of diversity.

Research shows that gender diverse boards make better group decisions, possibly because in most instances 50% off the market are women. And if you think men can understand how women think then you've got a very long way to go (just ask any married man).

Physiological such differences hormones in addition to social gender constructs mean men and women behave and think differently. So recognising these differences is not stereotyping, especially if you also recognise a breath of inidividual difference within each gender.

When selecting any work team diversity should be a goal. For example it is important to have accounts etc, on an engineering project to prevent the engineers from over engineering things and exceeding budgets or price targets. :wall:

Desmond
11-12-2008, 07:49 AM
Stop stereotyping. Plenty of them need encouragement. Even more now, since so many in the educracy and media are ranting about how evil Anglo-Saxon men are (ignoring their contributions to art, science and the abolition of slavery (http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/4932/)).Not so much recently, but in the past I have decided not to apply for particular jobs because of clauses such as "{x minority group} are encouraged to apply", when I am not in the minority group. It just seems to place others at a disadvantage.

Capablanca-Fan
11-12-2008, 09:20 AM
You obviously no nothing about modern business practices and research and you are obviously not willing to learn.
What nonsense.


I'll just take comfort in the fact that modern business leaders (at least sucessful ones do recognise the benefits of diversity.
Yeah, because they are less likely to be shaken down by the likes of Je$$e Jack$on and government "equal opportunity" bureaucrats.


Research shows that gender diverse boards make better group decisions, possibly because in most instances 50% off the market are women.
Doesn't follow at all.


And if you think men can understand how women think then you've got a very long way to go (just ask any married man).
I am a married man.


Physiological such differences hormones in addition to social gender constructs mean men and women behave and think differently.
Don't tell the Feminazis!


When selecting any work team diversity should be a goal. For example it is important to have accounts etc, on an engineering project to prevent the engineers from over engineering things and exceeding budgets or price targets. :wall:
Men and women are capable of this. No need for "diversity" crap.

TheJoker
11-12-2008, 12:13 PM
I am a married man.

Well do you think that men and women beahve and think differently? Or are they homogenous in this respect?



Men and women are capable of this. No need for "diversity" crap.

Diversity doesn't just apply to gender diversity :doh:

It can any number of things like specialisation (engineering/accountancy), culture, age, personalitly (submissive/dominant) etc, etc, etc.

Research shows that more homogenous work groups tend not to perform as well as diverse groups.


However I wouldn't assign much benefit to racial diversity, for the simple reason that racial persuasion does not tend to be associated with any attributes that are particulary useful to business (except perhaps racially diverse advertsing to identify with a broader range of potential customers).

Cultural diversity can be useful, I found that the Japanese have a very different approach to business management compared to westerners. It can often be useful to utilise the Japanese approach in various situations.

Igor_Goldenberg
11-12-2008, 12:40 PM
Well do you think that men and women beahve and think differently? Or are they homogenous in this respect?

Hmmm... If I remember marriage redefinition discussion well, one of the point was that women and men are different, hence the union of opposite sexes is inherently different by it's nature from the union of the same sexes. That point was not accepted by the proponents of change.

I can see that this point was only rejected in the terms of marriage redefinition debate, but accepted in the terms of another debate, where it's beneficial.

Well done:wall: :wall: :wall:

TheJoker
11-12-2008, 12:43 PM
Hmmm... If I remember marriage redefinition discussion well, one of the point was that women and men are different, hence the union of opposite sexes is inherently different by it's nature from the union of the same sexes. That point was not accepted by the proponents of change.

I can see that this point was only rejected in the terms of marriage redefinition debate, but accepted in the terms of another debate, where it's beneficial.

Well done:wall: :wall: :wall:
I never rejected that the union was different. Just didn't seem the need for different terminology. Strawman


Got anything constructive to add on workforce diversity?

Igor_Goldenberg
11-12-2008, 12:49 PM
I never rejected that the union was different. Just didn't seem the need for different terminology. Strawman


Got anything constructive to add on workforce diversity?
workforce diversity by itself is not a constructive idea.

TheJoker
11-12-2008, 01:12 PM
workforce diversity by itself is not a constructive idea.

Based on what premise?

There is plenty of research that counteracts your claim.

How did come to this conclusion?

Igor_Goldenberg
11-12-2008, 02:56 PM
Based on what premise?


On experience. Both personal and people that I know first hand.
Qualifications and merits are all that matter. If they are dispersed through different groups, you'll get people from those groups. If they are concentrated in one group, you get people from that group.


There is plenty of research that counteracts your claim.

What research? Do they really take into account other factors?

TheJoker
11-12-2008, 04:13 PM
On experience. Both personal and people that I know first hand.
Qualifications and merits are all that matter. If they are dispersed through different groups, you'll get people from those groups. If they are concentrated in one group, you get people from that group.



What research? Do they really take into account other factors?

Serious academic research. I should have some Harvard Business Review articles and maybe some from the Journal of Management. I'll see what I've got at home later tonight

Gender Diversity from Harvard Businees Review Article Abstract:


This article focuses on the authors' study of the effects on boardroom dynamics of increasing a female presence. They ask if there is any reason why companies should increase the number or women on their boards. Their work exposed dramatic differences among boards with one, two, or at least three women directors. Women directors make three contributions men don't: they broaden a board's discussions to better represent the concerns of a wide set of stakeholders, they can be more dogged in pursuing answers to difficult questions because there is no gender obligation to pretend they know everything, and they tend to bring a more collaborative approach to leadership.


From Business Horizions:


Does an organization's commitment to diversity result in competitive advantage and superior financial performance? Diversity can bring new voices and perspectives into the strategy dialogue, help managers understand and address the needs of a demographically diverse customer base, and stimulate a wider range of creative decision alternatives... In a study comparing the financial performance of the DiversityInc Top 50 Companies for Diversity to a matched sample, we find evidence that firms with a strong commitment to diversity outperform their peers on average.

A magazine article from US Banker:


Think diversity doesn't affect profits? Think again.
Research indicates that the most highly diverse executive
management teams generate far greater revenues
and profits than those organizations with the lowest percentage
of women on their executive teams,


There is also a harvard business review article that show the sucess of IBM's diversity program under Lou Gerstner, but I can't seem to locate it right now.

There is also a far maount of research that holds the opposite position particularly in relation to the effects of gender diversity on team performance.

Capablanca-Fan
12-12-2008, 02:51 PM
Yet Phyllis Schlafly's book Feminist Fantasies relates a case where a group of feminists who owned some shares decided to demand a female presence among the board of directors. This chairman of this silicon valley company was a rarity and refused to be shaken down. He replied that he would consider anyone with the requisite knowledge of electronics, their product and marketing, but not a token appointment to "diversity", since his first duty was to ALL shareholders to make the best appointments he could.

pappubahry
12-12-2008, 03:16 PM
Yet Phyllis Schlafly's book Feminist Fantasies

The Schlafly of Conservapedia fame?

Capablanca-Fan
12-12-2008, 04:19 PM
The Schlafly of Conservapedia fame?
The founder of Conservapedia is her son. Phyllis earned a BA at 19, an MA at 20, authored A Choice, Not an Echo which sold millions and was a denunciation of Republicans being Democrat-Lite, and practically single-handedly defeated the Equal Rights Amendment which had been passed in 30 of the necessary 38 states and enjoyed the support of both Republican and Democrat presidents.

TheJoker
12-12-2008, 10:18 PM
Yet Phyllis Schlafly's book Feminist Fantasies relates a case where a group of feminists who owned some shares decided to demand a female presence among the board of directors. This chairman of this silicon valley company was a rarity and refused to be shaken down. He replied that he would consider anyone with the requisite knowledge of electronics, their product and marketing, but not a token appointment to "diversity", since his first duty was to ALL shareholders to make the best appointments he could.

It's not about persuing diversity above all else it is about recognising that diversity represents a potential benefit. Basically you selecting someone in order to get a diversity of experience/skills. For exapmle a person who has had the experience of actually being a woman is more likely to be able to understand women's concerns. For some jobs that really isn't a concern, but trying to market a product or service to women it is better to get input from actual women rather than trying to second guess women's opinions often men don't even know the right questions to ask. I think most men know what I mean;)

Since almost all organisations rely on a significant female workforce it is also important that senior management be able to understand the concerns of their workforce, in order to prevent the cost that occurs with unecessary staff turnover.

Capablanca-Fan
13-12-2008, 02:42 PM
It's not about persuing diversity above all else it is about recognising that diversity represents a potential benefit. Basically you selecting someone in order to get a diversity of experience/skills. For exapmle a person who has had the experience of actually being a woman is more likely to be able to understand women's concerns. For some jobs that really isn't a concern, but trying to market a product or service to women it is better to get input from actual women rather than trying to second guess women's opinions often men don't even know the right questions to ask. I think most men know what I mean;)

Since almost all organisations rely on a significant female workforce it is also important that senior management be able to understand the concerns of their workforce, in order to prevent the cost that occurs with unecessary staff turnover.
All the above is likely true. But leave it up to the corporations to work it out. Government should not get involved, despite what Comrade Obamov thinks, while endorsing the "women earn only 70% of what men earn" furphy.