U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-02-2015, 10:39 AM
 
Location: H-Tine, Texas
6,742 posts, read 3,873,349 times
Reputation: 8522

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Apparently you don't know how most organizations do interviews. If you manage to even get in the door to be interviewed, you already ahead of the vast majority of applicants who won't even be called back. By creating a separate entrance for minorities, an unfair and unnecessary advantage has been created.

If, it is as you said, they will be hired on qualifications, then there is no need for it.
If you're trying to insinuate that an NFL franchise is not going to even interview a qualified white candidate for a coaching or management position just to interview a minority who isn't as qualified to fill a quota, then that is just flat out ridiculous. I must have missed where an organization can only interview so many applicants.

Once again, no one has answered how they determine whether a less than qualified minority is getting a job over a more qualified white male. People are acting like the black woman who dropped out of community college is getting the job over the white guy who graduated with honors from Cal-Berkeley, without an ounce of proof.


It's just more excuses coming from the side that complains when other groups make excuses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-02-2015, 10:49 AM
 
38,245 posts, read 15,339,527 times
Reputation: 16859
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATG5 View Post
... I must have missed where an organization can only interview so many applicants. ....
I already said that you have no familiarity at how corporations, especially large ones, are forced to do interviews.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 10:51 AM
 
Location: H-Tine, Texas
6,742 posts, read 3,873,349 times
Reputation: 8522
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
I already said that you have no familiarity at how corporations, especially large ones, are forced to do interviews.
Seeing as I've interviewed about a dozen candidates for positions, including my own, when I left my last position and I currently work for a corporation, you would be wrong.

More excuses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 10:59 AM
 
38,245 posts, read 15,339,527 times
Reputation: 16859
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATG5 View Post
Seeing as I've interviewed about a dozen candidates for positions, including my own, when I left my last position and I currently work for a corporation, you would be wrong.
Personal anecdotes are irrelevant. Since they can't be proved or verified they are not proof of anything. But they are often given when the party can't argue anything else.

However I will point out that in a large corporation, the party doing the actual interview is rarely the one who has first "sifted" the applications/resumes. i.e. decides who gets interviewed. So thank you for proving my point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 11:09 AM
 
Location: H-Tine, Texas
6,742 posts, read 3,873,349 times
Reputation: 8522
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Personal anecdotes are irrelevant. Since they can't be proved or verified they are not proof of anything. But they are often given when the party can't argue anything else.

However I will point out that in a large corporation, the party doing the actual interview is rarely the one who has first "sifted" the applications/resumes. i.e. decides who gets interviewed. So thank you for proving my point.
Oh, of course they are, just as your assumption that I don't know how corporations work is irrelevant, baseless and a complete deflection to what I posted.

Of course HR is usually the first to screen applications and resumes and conduct initial interviews outside of small businesses. Like I said, I work for a corporation, as well as applied and interviewed for others. It's common knowledge how the interview process works, especially if you have gone through it.

What you're forgetting is that when the resumes got to me by the time the candidate was past initial screening and the phone interviews, I was able to see each candidate's resume. There I was able to determine each had met or exceeded the educational requirements, experience, skills and qualifications based on the position. There wasn't a candidate in which I wondered how they got passed the initial screening and that far into the interview process, because they lacked the necessary qualifications and skills the other candidates had. The person they ended up hiring to replace me was a woman who came from Microsoft.

Nice try, though.


And once again, you haven't cited any examples in which an under-qualified minority candidate was picked over a qualified white candidate. I'd say "don't worry, I'll wait", but I don't have all of eternity to do so.

Excuses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 06:04 PM
 
Location: California
4,445 posts, read 5,175,063 times
Reputation: 9180
In my experience, I have seen hiring committees chose the best qualified person and send their decision to H.R. which sends it back telling them to pick a non-white applicant. How do they know? The last page of applications where the race questions are asked is separated and filed separately from the actual application - AFTER, the data is endered into the computer with the applicants other data. When they say those pages won't be considered for employement, it is totally misleading as there is a strong non-white hiring bias.

So turn on South Pacific and sing along while watching the evening news with its violent stories from many major cities including Ferguson. What does all that violence teach peaceful people!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2015, 09:38 PM
 
Location: Triad, NC
47 posts, read 25,121 times
Reputation: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by JobSeeker101 View Post
The vast majority of inventors and CEOs are white men. The vast majority of college students are white women.

The vast majority of pro football and basketball players are black men. The vast majority of prisoners based on percentage of population per race are black men, despite being a very minority % of the U.S. population.

Those are easily understandable facts backed by plenty of data. If you think none of these differences are based on science to some degree, then I'd love to hear your opinion. I only hope you don't attribute it to excuses such as "cops are mean" and "blacks are oppressed!"

Brain size average for East Asians = 1364cm3; Whites = 1347cm3; and Blacks = 1267cm3. Woah, science. In standardized testing, blacks score lower than whites each year even when going to the same school and receiving the same education. Blacks also tend to have more athletic ability. A simple difference of genetic strengths. Can this pseudo equality movement stop already? Can we not accept that we have different strengths and no amount of PC agenda mess will change this?

Different sexes and races have not, and never will be the same. We aren't meant to be.

I would like you to give me a scientific definition of "black" or "white". What scientifically constitutes "white" or "black" and what are the boundaries where "black" or "white" starts and stops and what exactly makes them "one race"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2015, 04:35 AM
 
5,713 posts, read 12,829,139 times
Reputation: 9010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerseygal4u View Post
Well,when someone will not hire you because your skin color is black and your hair is not mainstream,what should you do?


Let me ask you a question.....would you hire a woman of color who has an afro?
I would hire her the same as the white guy with long hair and tats as long as they were qualified and spoke English clearly.

How do YOU know they will not hire YOU because of your skin color or hair? OR was it that you were not qualified and couldn't be understood?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2015, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Corona del Mar & Coronado, CA
1,577 posts, read 1,122,176 times
Reputation: 1961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heidi60 View Post
In my experience, I have seen hiring committees chose the best qualified person and send their decision to H.R. which sends it back telling them to pick a non-white applicant. How do they know? The last page of applications where the race questions are asked is separated and filed separately from the actual application - AFTER, the data is endered into the computer with the applicants other data. When they say those pages won't be considered for employement, it is totally misleading as there is a strong non-white hiring bias.
You are speaking to your own experience, I can only speak to mine as a hiring manager (meaning I hire my direct reports), but I have never ever had HR tell me I had to hire someone, anyone, regardless of race, it is always my decision.

I have been asked by HR why I don't have more interviewees of color and I tell them it is because of the resumes I get when I have an opening. My HR department does get resumes too and when I open a job, they solicit for it and send me resumes of people who meet the qualifications I set, but I also get resumes from people my current staff knows and unsolicited resumes as well. Few of my direct reports are ever going to be entry level. My typical hire has 10 years experience and most have masters degrees. That cuts down the available pool for a lot of people of color, especially males. It just is what it is.

Point being, no one tells me who to hire or rejects my final choice, but I do get heat for who I interview based on racial make-up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2015, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Planet Earth
1,293 posts, read 898,388 times
Reputation: 798
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter View Post
hunh...... here are the two leading authorities on the English language on what words mean.

Webster's

1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2: racial prejudice or discrimination

Oxford

1. Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior:

2. The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races:

Bias and prejudice are not the same things.

It is sad you have been indoctrinated to believe otherwise.
I didn't say bias and prejudiced are the same thing. I said that being either isn't the same as being a racist!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top