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.
And you must have missed my comment in the first post about her, that I TRIED to help retrain her. She wasn't interested. She was too busy with her personal life at work to pay much attention.
To be honest, I don't know how or why she got the job, or how she made it through the training on the front end, because I wasn't there. All I know is that I was hired after her, in the same position and at the same pay, and if anyone needed help on the front end figuring out systems, and customers, etc. it was ME, not her. But I figured out really quickly that I couldn't go to her with any questions. At first I thought she was just withholding information for some reason. I was SHOCKED when I began to realize that she truly didn't know the answers to my questions.
I began at that point to feel some empathy for her. I thought that surely she was a bit frightened and overwhelmed with the job, since clearly she didn't know a lot about what she was being asked to do. So I started trying to help her, and when she DID have a question, she began to come to me because she knew I would not spill the beans on her and tell our manager just how little she knew (I never did, by the way.) Within a few months, I was moved to another branch at my request, and soon promoted to manager there so I had no responsibility or ability to help train her further, though I did see her regularly at events and ongoing training classes.
I heard you but I've been trying to point at a bigger picture. I've had to fire people, some of whom were minorities. Common theme was an unwillingness to learn and an immature relationship to authority (blind obedience or scofflaw extremes) that would only wind up being a liability for health life and safety of the entire crew. In my line of work mistakes had dramatic lethal and multi billion scale environmental consequences so perhaps that's why it made it easier for me to make harsh decisions. The one thing I dreaded was the day I'd have to call someones wife and inform the father of her children was gone. I made a promise to myself and a silent prayer about my own job performance every day. I'd rather be hated than fail the mission. I have a spotless safety record on my administrative resume worth more to me than tacky awards. I've also earned the trust and loyalty of a crew in the trenches. How much is that worth to the bean counters? But I digress...
Don't believe I'm out to paint all parties concerned in your company as monsters. As if whomever made the decisions to hire her and paper her training were the grand wizard of kkk opting for willful neglect as a new age tool of oppression rather than overt abuse and each and every one of you volunteered in a ceremony to be complicit. You need to see that in your silence you did enlist in this dysfunction. Naturally your defense is that you did not have the authority as a new hire, to take control of the direction the branch was in. Your instincts know that a web of lies has nothing to do with business & is harmful to all. It's not criminal to not know what to do about it, but withholding the information from upper mgmt for how long makes the entire branch look bad. The lies require eviction, which is not necessarily firing this woman or giving the ax to all. It's retraining everyone involved back to the ethical standard you know to be correct because your instincts won't be bothering you anymore. To restore the standard of meritocracy and make an all hands push for her to step up to the plate and realize her truthful aptitude. Not her papered delusion others I've never met sold her.
The best way to illustrate my point is to revise history placing myself in the role of leader & retaining you as leader in training to get it solved but that would prove quite windy. The core of the problem is the abuse of the definition of affirmative action, not by this woman, but by leadership and covert racist narratives wheedling it's way in corporate culture. The legal dept in corporate steering mgmt is the culprit. They've sold this notion as a means to inflate their importance and salaries to the board. The mythology in question is that affirmative action has given license to a private in the army to hijack the mission statement and the legitimate authority invested in Generals to steer is the problem. Not the army. Not the private. The evil bird in the ears of the staff creating a dysfunctional culture of a house divided against itself. Between the lines of all you said is the notion that to succeed requires negative competition. To resort to immoral activity to present a face of propriety & distance themselves from responsibility as a means to cover thine arse. The rewards in your company are going to those who avoid looking at and confronting problems honestly. The rewards are going to those who dodge responsibility in leadership roles. This must end. Racism is quite costly, not in the courtroom that all believe. It's the tax imposed in human relations undermining the personal best of all employees & the larger community. See it now?
As for hiring, it's agreed that hucksters are not welcome. The hucksters you're concerned about can be discerned on resume with spotty short lived stint employment, and also through public records seeing how many frivolous lawsuits are associated with them. Harder to detect early on are racists, covert or overt, that tend to ride on coattails of others. All of the above are a departure from good order and discipline that's corrosive to the mission.
I'm not in your industry. I'm not your competitor. It would genuinely please me to know the investment I've made responding to this thread yields fruit for you all. That you would shine as a leader. That one branch in one town in Texas would thrive. But that can't happen until, in the spirit of Walsingham, you commit yourselves to telling truth to power and take meaningful possession of the authority vested in you in your managerial capacity. Good luck to you, Kathryn. And good luck to this woman you spoke of realizing her true potential, her true aptitude, in whatever field of work she truly belongs. I wish you all to shine on merits. THAT is the true purpose of affirmative action. Not to put a foot on scales favoring one lie over another lie. It's the restoration and defense of truth. Of true meritocracy & the fruit of authentic free market. Not a crime syndicate in lieu of legitimate commerce.
Well, that's a sad, shallow existence. Most people of average intelligence realize there are good and bad in every race. I have had bad experiences with white people. But, that certainly hasn't influenced my relationship with white people in general. Likewise, I have had bad experiences with black people. Should I hate all black people, including myself, due to the behavior of some? That defies any semblance of logic.
People are people. Some are nice, while others are mean-spirited and hateful. That's just the way it is. Those who choose to relate to an entire race on the basis of their experience with a select group, should open their minds, and stop looking for excuses to hate.
I know a woman who was raised in an all-white environment. She too, had been taught that black people are lowlifes, and not to be trusted. She was very aloof, and avoided even cursory contact with me. I didn't question her behavior. Actually, I have never allowed myself to worry about how others choose to relate to me. I treat others as I would like to be treated, and leave it at that. If you like me, fine. If you don't, fine. Just don't pretend. That has always been my philosophy.
Well, as fate would have it, I became her new boss. The expression on her face was quite a Kodak moment. Now, she had to interact with me, or find another job. Initially, her disdain for me was palpable; while I remained professional, affable, and treated her fairly. Frankly, as long as she did her job, and did nothing to undermine or disrespect me, I could not have cared less how she felt. To make a very long story short, she eventually told me that she had never allowed herself to actually know a black person, because she had been taught to hate. She said her experience as my direct report helped her realize she had been fed a lie. We worked together for several years, and although I left the company over 10 years ago, we remain in contact, and she has yet to miss calling me on my birthday.
Bottom line: We will never understand each other if we refuse to even try.
As usual an excellent and thought provoking post, Benicar.
I got a better idea, how about if some black people get so offended when I refer to them as blacks and instead prefer the term "African American", how about they refer to me as a European American? Fancy titles for certain people and simpler titles for others infer special treatment, and equality is supposed to be the end goal, last time I checked. So as long as they refer to me as white, I'll refer to them as black.
Honestly I'd rather drop the silly practice of using continents to indicate ancestral lineage, because plain old colors are so much easier. I'll be white, then there's blacks, Asians will be yellows, Hispanics and Latinos can be either browns or oranges (or both, really don't care), native Americans will be reds, etc. Seems pretty logical to me.
I once wittness a lady get mugged by a black man in a black neighborhood. When the police came I wanted to tell them what I saw. I felt uncomfortable telling the police the mugger was black. Even though the lady who was robbed was black herself. I felt like I was offending people by saying so. But I was also feeling uncomfortable calling him African American.
In the end I did call him black. I made a choice. I mean, I could have called him " dark brown man". Would that have been better? Please tell.
After reading innumerable threads and comments regarding racial self-identification, lack of assimilation, and screeds about multiculturalism I thought to myself why is it that I've never read a thread or comment advocating the ending of the classification referred to as white? I mean if African American is so offensive because of its alleged inaccuracy then why not do a way with the term white, after all, white people are exactly white or anything close to it. So, in the hopes of bringing about that much touted color blind society, I would like to make the following offer.
Do away with the idea or whiteness and I will stop identifying myself as an African American and ask others to do the same.
What do you think?
???????????
More race baiting?
How many white Americans refer to themselves as "White American", or "German American", or "English American" or "Norwegian American"?
Answer- None
It is now officially time for you to stop referring to yourself as "Afro-American". When you DEFINE yourself by your race, then expect OTHERS to define you by your race as well.
I got a better idea, how about if some black people get so offended when I refer to them as blacks and instead prefer the term "African American", how about they refer to me as a European American? Fancy titles for certain people and simpler titles for others infer special treatment, and equality is supposed to be the end goal, last time I checked. So as long as they refer to me as white, I'll refer to them as black.
Honestly I'd rather drop the silly practice of using continents to indicate ancestral lineage, because plain old colors are so much easier. I'll be white, then there's blacks, Asians will be yellows, Hispanics and Latinos can be either browns or oranges (or both, really don't care), native Americans will be reds, etc. Seems pretty logical to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by glass_of_merlot
I once wittness a lady get mugged by a black man in a black neighborhood. When the police came I wanted to tell them what I saw. I felt uncomfortable telling the police the mugger was black. Even though the lady who was robbed was black herself. I felt like I was offending people by saying so. But I was also feeling uncomfortable calling him African American.
In the end I did call him black. I made a choice. I mean, I could have called him " dark brown man". Would that have been better? Please tell.
This black woman doesn't care which term you use. While I don't refer to myself as an African-American, I have no problem with the preference of others. To each his/her own. Respect me, and I will respect you. That's all that matters. On here, just call me Benicar.
I once wittness a lady get mugged by a black man in a black neighborhood. When the police came I wanted to tell them what I saw. I felt uncomfortable telling the police the mugger was black. Even though the lady who was robbed was black herself. I felt like I was offending people by saying so. But I was also feeling uncomfortable calling him African American.
In the end I did call him black. I made a choice. I mean, I could have called him " dark brown man". Would that have been better? Please tell.
I'm still trying to figure out what the OP is trying to say, can someone explain in layman terms?
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.
