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.
That's uncalled for... (I don't like BLM either because their protesting in the wrong places but no need to jump to unnecessary conclusions)
I don't think she made a racist comment at all, but was trying to stress diversity, If she made the same about blacks in a large company I would fully support her, unless of course she was talking about a small company from a predominantly white region then of course no. Same with any other race or ethnicity.
"Diversity": Another word for the special snowflakes who thinks everyone deserves a trophy. As long as you're not a straight white male, your qualifications are secondary to your diverseness.
It was a talk about promoting diversity. She just mentioned that they try to promote diversity at all levels, within the company, through suppliers, etc. It was an example, she didn't say they refused to do business with them because they were all Caucasian males.
I don't see anything wrong with the statement given the context.
This is absolutely racist & sexist. People trying to absolve her because of her gender\race are trying to play by a different set of rules.
For example, lets say that there were 4 people from the other company and they hired from a pool that was 50% white\male due to geography, the type of company etc. and hired completely randomly.
There would be a 1 in 16 chance of those 4 jobs being filled by white males.
Maybe it happened to be in a field like engineering where the pool in general 80% white males? Then the chances are close to 40% that they'd all be white male.
She didn't factor any of that in but instead came to the immediate conclusion that all white men = BAD. Sorry folks, spin it any way you want but it's clear sexism\racism.
Additionally, what if she went to a company and it had 4 people but no white men. Do you think she'd have questioned the lack of diversity?
No. She wouldn't have and if you tell me she would have you're a liar.
This is absolutely racist & sexist. People trying to absolve her because of her gender\race are trying to play by a different set of rules.
For example, lets say that there were 4 people from the other company and they hired from a pool that was 50% white\male due to geography, the type of company etc. and hired completely randomly.
There would be a 1 in 16 chance of those 4 jobs being filled by white males.
Maybe it happened to be in a field like engineering where the pool in general 80% white males? Then the chances are close to 40% that they'd all be white male.
She didn't factor any of that in but instead came to the immediate conclusion that all white men = BAD. Sorry folks, spin it any way you want but it's clear sexism\racism.
Additionally, what if she went to a company and it had 4 people but no white men. Do you think she'd have questioned the lack of diversity?
No. She wouldn't have and if you tell me she would have you're a liar.
So talks about diversity are racist? Interesting......
There is info we don't know. On the whole, I find her comments racist. There are many legitimate reasons for why that company may have been all male and all white. They didn't need to explain themselves to her. It wasn't her place to call someone about it. Her job was to work on a deal.
It was a talk about promoting diversity. She just mentioned that they try to promote diversity at all levels, within the company, through suppliers, etc. It was an example, she didn't say they refused to do business with them because they were all Caucasian males.
I don't see anything wrong with the statement given the context.
She said she would absolutely hire blacks over whites no matter what. There goes your theory.
"Just today we met with a supplier and the entire other side of the table was all Caucasian males. That was interesting," Brewer said. "I decided not to talk about it directly with [the supplier's] folks in the room because there were actually no female, like, levels down. So I’m going to place a call to him.""
Shouldn't the only qualification be: Who is best qualified to do a job?
Plus what business/right is it of a CEO of company A to want to control company B's policy, no matter what the policy/matter is? Don't like something about company B? Great, don't do business with them. Period.
I want to know why blacks make up over 90 percent of pro basketball rosters then. Why is that? How can that be when they only make up 15 percent of the population? I'll tell you why it is..they are best qualified for the job. If we want diversity , maybe Pete who cant touch the net should play because he is white.. Diversity is great until it affects the bottom line.
And no, I am not saying a white basketball player can't be great or a black man can't be a great CEO.
I'm not much of a fan for forced diversity to feel "PC goodness".
The color of your skin or your gender should not be part of the hiring process.
The government can do it because they don't seek profits so they can hire based on skin color or gender.
But companies need to make profits so skill has to be the #1 priority.
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.
