Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
SEC. 2000e-2. [Section 703]
(a) Employer practices
It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer -
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Thanks. Do you content that the Mecklenburg Board of County Commissioners has performed those practices? Do you think "applicants for employment" include people that have not applied for the job because there is no job posting?
I do not. For whatever happens in the future we'll have to see. My predictions are in an earlier reply.
I also have noticed over the years that black business people have established various networks outside of the traditional "white" networks you mentioned . . . whose membership is minorities only. Large professional organizations (such as those for accountants, or healthcare execs, for ex) almost always have an additional section for minorities and promoting minority leadership. Of course, that has been something that has basically come about since the 80s.
Yes, steps have been and are being taken to help overcome the networking deficiency. I think networking organizations that are diverse overall are better, but I think they have to be established that way to be truly effective. A lot of time, integrating existing networks results in tensions and frustrations that folks of all races (and both sexes) would just rather avoid; they don't think any potential benefits are worth the hassle. For instance, many Blacks/women often wonder if they will be truly accepted as professional equals by their White peers/colleagues based on education, experience, skill set, etc. instead of being automatically regarded as an "affirmative action" beneficiary. And many Whites/males feel as though they may have to walk on eggshells when talking about anything even remotely having to do with race/gender in fear of being offensive.
Quote:
Don't know about the "coded language" assertion - I do understand the logic of what you are saying, but as a female, I was never in those clubs, either . . . but I found my own methods of networking and reaching key people (with volunteerism being one of those ways, as well as belonging to organizations that promoted community arts, for example).
Well I know the golf example is more relative to the "good ol' boys" club, but generally White women still have more access to broader networks through school-based organizations (e.g., PTO's, Booster Clubs, etc.), places of worship, etc. For the most part, this is simply a natural outgrowth of the residential segregation patterns that still persist throughout most of the country and are the results of decades of intentional discriminatory policy decisions.
Quote:
I also think that the white community has become a bit prickly about the assertions that the world revolves around the machinations of white males. Statistics have made it very clear: when you combine minorities and compare it to the ratio of caucasians in the country, caucasians will soon be the minority, and in many areas of the country, they already are.
So this enduring belief that white males always have the upper hand is not accurate and becoming less so on a daily basis. White folks want to know that they will receive a fair shake at the employment table and sometimes, the message has been . . . let's punish anyone who isn't a minority, cause white folks had ancestors who were slaveowners - and white men have "kept us down" for centuries.
Of course, I am simplifying that (and being a bit facetious, as well). But Ratliff's quick assertion to rule out a white male for a highly compensated leadership role in this county was enough for my discrimination radar to click "on."
I understand your point about numbers, but let's face it: White males have had the upper hand in this country since it was founded. Even in the face of rapid minority growth, White males still possess a highly disproportionate amount of power and influence in this country and will do so for the foreseeable future. Now this isn't to justify what the county commissioner said because I believe her approach is wrong and discriminatory, but White males need not worry about their power being significantly diminished anytime soon.
Quote:
I wish we could have a sane discussion about race relations in this country. Your post gives me hope that one day, we will be able to do that without the reciminations and defensiveness from both sides.
Thanks. Do you content that the Mecklenburg Board of County Commissioners has performed those practices? Do you think "applicants for employment" include people that have not applied for the job because there is no job posting?
I do not. For whatever happens in the future we'll have to see. My predictions are in an earlier reply.
The reason SouthBound has said that Ratliff needs to recuse herself from any other participation in the process is b/c with a public statement comes an implication . . . that at least one member of the board has a preference, and that preference is to exclude white males, and further, that this may be "standard operating procedure" for the selection committee, i.e. a bias toward discrimination against a particular gender and/or race. It could also be seen as undue influence from one member towards creating a climate of racial and/or gender preference within the group.
Presenting the process as one in which the members may have already decided what races and/or gender will be excluded (or viewed favorably, for that matter) sets up the stage for a candidate who did not get the job, but is otherwise "qualified," to file a lawsuit.
I am no attorney and not interested in playing one on C-D, lol . . . but I do know that bias has to be established in order to win a lawsuit, and it seems to me that Ms. Ratliff's statements did just that.
The reason SouthBound has said that Ratliff needs to recuse herself from any other participation in the process is b/c with a public statement comes an implication . . . that at least one member of the board has a preference, and that preference is to exclude white males, and further, that this may be "standard operating procedure" for the selection committee, i.e. a bias toward discrimination against a particular gender and/or race. It could also be seen as undue influence from one member towards creating a climate of racial and/or gender preference within the group.
Presenting the process as one in which the members may have already decided what races and/or gender will be excluded (or viewed favorably, for that matter) sets up the stage for a candidate who did not get the job, but is otherwise "qualified," to file a lawsuit.
I am no attorney and not interested in playing one on C-D, lol . . . but I do know that bias has to be established in order to win a lawsuit, and it seems to me that Ms. Ratliff's statements did just that.
I was with you until you said "selection committee". She isn't on the committee thank God. The reason she isn't is she sniped at the Chair and now wonders why the Chair doesn't like her.
Also, I don't want a manager that doesn't sniff around. One that does will find maybe three potential racists on the board, and one homophobe. Plus a chair that has no problem going to Raleigh to get advise on firing a manager without even telling opposing members that she's going. Oh, and one that babbled for 30 minutes on how the Observer should be investigated for investigating the county.
That's a lot to overcome. I would say that off the comments that I have heard, especially the accusations of board members being racists made by other board members (pretty much saying one of the white guys was acting like he was running a plantation), Kim's is the least serious.
If they only know what Kim said then they ain't qualified to be managed by this circus.
I don't think Kim matters because I think the board will rubber stamp what the committee recommends.
But I'm also betting I know who the next manager might be. Probably a longshot and since we're spending $50K to find a new manager I'm probably wrong. If Bobbie Shields can handle his duties as general manager, assessor and acting manager then for God's sake just give him the job.
Of course there may have been a clause saying he can't apply or if you want to get real cynical maybe that was Kim's aim. She may have made it easier for him to get the job. I have no idea if he's even interested.
Honestly I think it would take a special kind of fool to take the job. They should probably just give it back to Harry.
MUTINY77: excellent points. I understand your thoughts and think your analysis is quite accurate. I would dispute black women as opposed to white women having less access to some groups based on segregation of neighborhoods, b/c I don't see this as a social issue as much as an economic issue, and successful mid management black women can choose to live in the same neighborhoods that successful middle management white women choose live in, which would also put them in the same school district.
That being said, one of my black female friends once told me that although her interactions with white women in Charlotte are typically very polite, congenial and cooperative (both in social situations and at work) she has noticed that white women rarely actually look her in the eyes, leaving her always feeling there is a bit of a disconnect and disingenuity with their interactions. I didn't ask, but I assumed this also meant she is not likely to be receiving many invites to after hours social events with those women, at least to the degree to consider any of them friends.
Yes, we live in a patriarchal society, which is one reason I have been particularly interested in Hillary Clinton's career: a woman who is definitely as intelligent as her husband (may be smarter!) and who not only had a substantial career of her own, she also did what many women have done for centuries, and backed a successful man towards reaching goals that she could not attain on her own. I do think with Boomers has come a change . . . women can launch their own successful political career and no longer feel the only way to the White House is via marriage, lol. However, my theory hasn't been proven, since we haven't had a female President yet!
But yes, I do see what you are saying about powerful white males being in charge, historically, of most industries, although this is changing, as well.
I am not upset about that change; no one group has all the talent and all the leadership skills. My concern has been one of fairness for everyone who has worked hard to earn a seat at the table.
Last edited by brokensky; 07-03-2013 at 11:44 PM..
I was with you until you said "selection committee". She isn't on the committee thank God. The reason she isn't is she sniped at the Chair and now wonders why the Chair doesn't like her.
Also, I don't want a manager that doesn't sniff around. One that does will find maybe three potential racists on the board, and one homophobe. Plus a chair that has no problem going to Raleigh to get advise on firing a manager without even telling opposing members that she's going. Oh, and one that babbled for 30 minutes on how the Observer should be investigated for investigating the county.
That's a lot to overcome. I would say that off the comments that I have heard, especially the accusations of board members being racists made by other board members (pretty much saying one of the white guys was acting like he was running a plantation), Kim's is the least serious.
If they only know what Kim said then they ain't qualified to be managed by this circus.
I don't think Kim matters because I think the board will rubber stamp what the committee recommends.
But I'm also betting I know who the next manager might be. Probably a longshot and since we're spending $50K to find a new manager I'm probably wrong. If Bobbie Shields can handle his duties as general manager, assessor and acting manager then for God's sake just give him the job.
Of course there may have been a clause saying he can't apply or if you want to get real cynical maybe that was Kim's aim. She may have made it easier for him to get the job. I have no idea if he's even interested.
Honestly I think it would take a special kind of fool to take the job. They should probably just give it back to Harry.
Harry is done, lol. I don't think he would want it back, plus I am sure he and his family are focusing on dealing with is health issues at this juncture.
I just wanted to clarify something: I know that Ratliff is not on the selection committee . . . we had discussed that upthread . . . but she is a member of the commission and we have no way of knowing how much influence she does or doesn't have over other members, nor do we know how much she may or may not reflect the thinking and biases of the people who ARE on the selection committee. What we also might question is . . . if she has served this long and is that ignorant of the law (in re: to discrimination) . . . how many others are this unaware, as well? Or who may agree with her "preferences?" Sorry that this was unclear. I am not writing my best . . . time to go to bed!!!
Harry is done, lol. I don't think he would want it back, plus I am sure he and his family are focusing on dealing with is health issues at this juncture.
I just wanted to clarify something: I know that Ratliff is not on the selection committee . . . we had discussed that upthread . . . but she is a member of the commission and we have no way of knowing how much influence she does or doesn't have over other members, nor do we know how much she may or may not reflect the thinking and biases of the people who ARE on the selection committee. What we also might question is . . . if she has served this long and is that ignorant of the law (in re: to discrimination) . . . how many others are this unaware, as well? Or who may agree with her "preferences?" Sorry that this was unclear. I am not writing my best . . . time to go to bed!!!
Yeah I can't go all night and make it to the cookout! I totally got ya and my opinions are just based on knowing the personalities. I really don't think she meant it. I used to make some amazing slip ups myself. But I didn't get voted in to government. I'll have to research her more to see what got her there.
I think the problem is the poisoned well. That's what they have to deal with now. I don't think she'll be more than a blip when the time comes for the vote. I bet it will be 9-0.
I understand your point about numbers, but let's face it: White males have had the upper hand in this country since it was founded. Even in the face of rapid minority growth, White males still possess a highly disproportionate amount of power and influence in this country and will do so for the foreseeable future. Now this isn't to justify what the county commissioner said because I believe her approach is wrong and discriminatory, but White males need not worry about their power being significantly diminished anytime soon
Broad single view generalities about the USA's history really seem to be some sort of justification for Ratliff even though you say it isn't. White males founded the USA so of course they had the upper hand. But using 21st century values to judge the 17th, 18th, 19th and most of the 20th century is mostly pointless don't you think? That is, if you are not trying to justify Ratliff.
In 2013 there are only 3 White males out of 9 on the Mecklenburg county council. This even though the county is 61% White. A Black females has stated that she does not want to see the council hire a White male for county manager whether qualified or not. In your long post the only relevant point to this topic is the bold part. i.e. You think what Ratliff did was wrong and discriminatory.
Nobody can change the past. They can only influence the future. Instead of learning from it, Ratliff is using history to justify more discrimination and racism to fix what she thinks is a wrong. If she really paid attention to history, she would find that it doesn't work.
Broad single view generalities about the USA's history really seem to be some sort of justification for Ratliff even though you say it isn't. White males founded the USA so of course they had the upper hand. But using 21st century values to judge the 17th, 18th, 19th and most of the 20th century is mostly pointless don't you think? That is, if you are not trying to justify Ratliff.
In 2013 there are only 3 White males out of 9 on the Mecklenburg county council. This even though the county is 61% White. A Black females has stated that she does not want to see the council hire a White male for county manager whether qualified or not. In your long post the only relevant point to this topic is the bold part. i.e. You think what Ratliff did was wrong and discriminatory.
Nobody can change the past. They can only influence the future. Instead of learning from it, Ratliff is using history to justify more discrimination and racism to fix what she thinks is a wrong. If she really paid attention to history, she would find that it doesn't work.
Understand that I entered this discussion as it concerned a specific point about African Americans and the job market/employment prospects in response to one of anifani821's posts, not about Ratliff's statement specifically. It's easy enough to see what she said was inappropriate, but I don't see how that negates anything I said and how that applies generally.
I can believe this. I worked in government and the unwritten rule was that no white male was to be promoted to a supervisory position unless no one else was available. That comes from personal knowledge so I am not talking to hear my head rattle.
Just imagine if such a directive said that (fill in the blank) person could not be considered.
This is the America we live in today; not unlike Germany under Hitler when the Jews were singled out for discrimination and eventually extermination. And people are blind to this with this going on right under their noses.
Until the liberal lapdog press starts reporting the news in an even handed way this will continue so long as the masses are so hopelessly ignorant of current events. But there is some hope. The network news is dwindling fast and major newspapers are failing because of their one sided reporting. Not everyone is drinking the Kool-aid.
If I were Jewish, I'd find this HIGHLY offensive. This is beyond exaggeration.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
