|
|
Post by ratcliff on Dec 4, 2023 2:47:03 GMT
So are black people discriminating against CVs with African or Asian names or not ? If they are not then why should they attend these classes ? You talk in riddles . That still leaves your claim that while people discriminate against CVs with African and Asian names an assumption . It still doesn’t refute the point that the initial selection relies on discrimination to function and that you want people with Black and Asian names to be an exception. You have no solution except some vague notion of classes about irrational hatred . The evidence suggests that it is ethnic minorities on the receiving end of discrimination in the case of the CV selection, that doesn't mean there aren't or won't be instances of discrimination going in the other direction. "It still doesn’t refute the point that the initial selection relies on discrimination to function and that you want people with Black and Asian names to be an exception." I don't want them to be the exception, I want everyone to be given an equal chance and stand or fall on merit alone. Now you are saying a job should be awarded on merit alone - earlier you were appearing to agree with me that it is perfectly acceptable for a suitably qualified interviewee to be turned down fr a job because the interviewer feels that they will not be a good fit for the existing workforce Make your mind up |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Dec 4, 2023 7:07:45 GMT
The evidence suggests that it is ethnic minorities on the receiving end of discrimination in the case of the CV selection, that doesn't mean there aren't or won't be instances of discrimination going in the other direction. "It still doesn’t refute the point that the initial selection relies on discrimination to function and that you want people with Black and Asian names to be an exception." I don't want them to be the exception, I want everyone to be given an equal chance and stand or fall on merit alone. Now you are saying a job should be awarded on merit alone - earlier you were appearing to agree with me that it is perfectly acceptable for a suitably qualified interviewee to be turned down fr a job because the interviewer feels that they will not be a good fit for the existing workforce Make your mind up Being a good fit with the team and company values is a merit issue for me as it can effect performance. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Dec 4, 2023 7:09:55 GMT
I don't believe I said that, how they would fit in with the team and company culture/values personality wise relates to capability. It's not remotely similar to dismissing them out of hand because of their skin tone. You posted that a decision should not be made on feelings as that is discriminatory in your opinion. A job candidate , may, on paper fit the bill so is invited to interview Your ''feeling'' at interview is that they may well be suitably qualified but you ''feel'' that they would not gel with your current workforce so offer the job to someone else who you ''feel'' is a better fit for your team. Now you are trying to dodge your previous post by claiming that someone (suitably qualified on paper with required experience and could be any colour/race/religion) is not being discriminated against if the interviewer 'feels' will not fit in with the team. So 'feelings'' are allowed How can you get a feeling for someone from their name alone? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 4, 2023 7:20:01 GMT
I don't believe I said that, how they would fit in with the team and company culture/values personality wise relates to capability. It's not remotely similar to dismissing them out of hand because of their skin tone. You posted that a decision should not be made on feelings as that is discriminatory in your opinion. A job candidate , may, on paper fit the bill so is invited to interview Your ''feeling'' at interview is that they may well be suitably qualified but you ''feel'' that they would not gel with your current workforce so offer the job to someone else who you ''feel'' is a better fit for your team. Now you are trying to dodge your previous post by claiming that someone (suitably qualified on paper with required experience and could be any colour/race/religion) is not being discriminated against if the interviewer 'feels' will not fit in with the team. So 'feelings'' are allowed Of course how you feel/gel with a potential employee matters. The secret is not to let preconceptions or stereotyping effect your decision. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Dec 4, 2023 8:59:53 GMT
It's not just your feelings that matter but also those of existing employees and, in some occupations, those of customers too.
When I worked in Silly Valley it was common practice to staff the workaday techie positions with Asians but never to put them in customer-facing roles. Awfully discriminatory I know, but that's the real world for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Dec 4, 2023 9:09:23 GMT
It worked for Brexit. I find it odd you think such an idea destroys democracy. I disagree with your opinion of the international courts, they are not making up laws but merely acting on laws well established and often made by us in the first place. ..if we cannot modify the modified externally international agreements then we have no democracy. Indeed. This arrangement also provides an endless open-goal opportunity for those who want things implemented in such a way that they can (almost) never be changed back All you need is to get them through once and to have a co-operative international apparatus (ie others in other countries wanting the same). Once implemented, you can make sure there are gigantic costs for repealing and therefore trap tens of millions of people in baroque, costly arrangements they never asked for and don't want |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Dec 4, 2023 9:14:47 GMT
You posted that a decision should not be made on feelings as that is discriminatory in your opinion. A job candidate , may, on paper fit the bill so is invited to interview Your ''feeling'' at interview is that they may well be suitably qualified but you ''feel'' that they would not gel with your current workforce so offer the job to someone else who you ''feel'' is a better fit for your team. Now you are trying to dodge your previous post by claiming that someone (suitably qualified on paper with required experience and could be any colour/race/religion) is not being discriminated against if the interviewer 'feels' will not fit in with the team. So 'feelings'' are allowed Of course how you feel/gel with a potential employee matters. The secret is not to let preconceptions or stereotyping effect your decision. You can't get a very completer picture using facts only. Preconceptions / experience etc are at least half of any decision made by anyone and these things form a natural risk analysis. Asking people not to do this is idiotic - it's like asking people to turn their brains off or give the decision to someone else. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2023 12:01:31 GMT
If you insist upon talking such obvious sense, they'll start calling you an extremist in a minute. Or a Remoaner. Which of course they think is the same thing, lol Or the very worst, Leftie  The one they most readily want to pin on us is "far left remoaner". You don't actually have to be far left at all nor very much of a moaner. Simply being slightly to the left of Tony Blair and less than utterly ecstatic about the way Brexit is panning out is all it takes. Right wingers, and even some centrists, have been wilfully mislabelling opponents with wholly inaccurate extremist labels for decades now. It is a regular part of their armoury. Even Labour party centrists, let alone right wingers outside the party, are wont to call anyone who wants more council housing, more tenants rights, more workers rights, and publicly owned utilities, a "trot". I heard it all the time in the party. And yet an actual Trotskyite believes in permanent revolution, the hegemony of the working class, and the eradication of capitalism. Calling someone who merely believes in building council houses and limited nationalisation of the essential utilities a "trot" is deliberately dishonest mislabelling. Those they call "trots" today were once regarded as mainstream social democrats for believing in exactly the same things. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 4, 2023 13:41:53 GMT
I think so, I was suggesting public protest driving government to a referendum. Sure parliament cannot be bound but it is. Their are laws in this country that parliament cannot usurp, just as there are international ones. Are there UK laws that exist that Parliament if it so voted could not usurp (change)? Have you got an example? |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Dec 4, 2023 15:35:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Dec 4, 2023 15:41:28 GMT
Albanians are the easiest illegal boat people to deal with, they have no legal right to be in the UK, round them all up and send them back.
I have no idea why this government are pussyfooting around, Albanians kicked out.
Sunak/Labour aren't going to rest until the UK is a total shithole that no business or individuals outside will want to deal with, London once the financial capital of the world, the Albanians will turn us into the drugs capital of the world, they are criminals and have no legal right under any convention to be in the UK.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Dec 4, 2023 16:27:58 GMT
As I have pointed out may times Albanians drug gangs have been around since the early 2000s ( as the article confirms).
The good people of North London knows it too.
Why is this old news suddenly new ?
|
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Dec 4, 2023 17:29:37 GMT
Now you are saying a job should be awarded on merit alone - earlier you were appearing to agree with me that it is perfectly acceptable for a suitably qualified interviewee to be turned down fr a job because the interviewer feels that they will not be a good fit for the existing workforce Make your mind up Being a good fit with the team and company values is a merit issue for me as it can effect performance. Judging the personality of an apparently suitably qualified interviewee as to whether on not they would gel with your existing workforce is an intangible 'feeling' , it has nothing to do with either the merit of their application or the colour of their skin |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Dec 4, 2023 18:18:37 GMT
Ok there’s 55 pages on this and i just can’t be arsed.
We all know the reality here. ‘Care Homes’ cost a huge amount of money and provide a shit service to those whose savings they bleed dry. Nobody wants to do these jobs so we used to import people. Now we can’t. You might have noticed Cleverley is on his feet or was a little while ago whacking up the minimum salary an employer can pay to a worker brought in from abroad, because he’s just noticed the hike in national min wage makes it illegal to pay people ‘80% of the going rate’ for ‘shortage’ occupations.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Dec 4, 2023 18:47:30 GMT
Or the very worst, Leftie The one they most readily want to pin on us is "far left remoaner". You don't actually have to be far left at all nor very much of a moaner. Simply being slightly to the left of Tony Blair and less than utterly ecstatic about the way Brexit is panning out is all it takes. Right wingers, and even some centrists, have been wilfully mislabelling opponents with wholly inaccurate extremist labels for decades now. It is a regular part of their armoury. Even Labour party centrists, let alone right wingers outside the party, are wont to call anyone who wants more council housing, more tenants rights, more workers rights, and publicly owned utilities, a "trot". I heard it all the time in the party. And yet an actual Trotskyite believes in permanent revolution, the hegemony of the working class, and the eradication of capitalism. Calling someone who merely believes in building council houses and limited nationalisation of the essential utilities a "trot" is deliberately dishonest mislabelling. Those they call "trots" today were once regarded as mainstream social democrats for believing in exactly the same things. You seem to be expecting some sort of morals or integrity. Good luck with that on here. Most are only here to vent their frustrations at a world so different to what they want. What makes me laugh is that almost the entire world seems to be doing the opposite of what they want and yet they still think they are the silent majority on all subjects. |
|
