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.
Yes, we have strayed off the topic a bit (this happens in CD). I do find one thing I think you are saying troubling. You seem to be saying fears of a lawsuit has led companies to sometimes select a person of color over a more qualified white person and that you've seen it. I'd be careful in looking at a situation and thinking I know what is going on. Who decides whether a candidate is more qualified than another? You? Me? Based on what? My gut tells me that quite a few non-qualifed white men have also been selected for jobs, and I suspect sometimes as the expense of a person of color. (Actually, more than my gut - I spent many years in corporate America.)
You and I simply disagree over the need to continue AA. "Affirmative Actions" are steps employers must take to expand their pool of eligible applicants, then may the best man or woman win. Companies don't hire people - people who work for companies hire people. Without AA outreach to expand the applicant pool, I think it's likely well-meaning people will revert to what's comfortable - seeking applicants from where they went to college, their church, their country club or their neighborhood. This dynamic would be the same regardless of the race of the person who is doing the hiring - people tend to migrant towards and appreciate those who are similar to them (nepotism is the ultimate example of this). The rub comes because in the majority culture of corporate America, most of the people doing this hiring are white males. Hence AA provides a more diverse slate of applicants with a chance to even compete.
Does it work perfectly all the time? No. Does it mean we should scrap the whole thing? Not in my opinion.
I see your point. I think my problem with what your saying is while it gives the minorities a chance to compete, I don't think that it's very effective because I think that someone that wouldn't otherwise give the person a chance to compete sure as hell won't consider hiring them.
I see your point. I think my problem with what your saying is while it gives the minorities a chance to compete, I don't think that it's very effective because I think that someone that wouldn't otherwise give the person a chance to compete sure as hell won't consider hiring them.
So that's where the next step of law comes in. Let's say after years of having diverse applicant slates that include qualified women and minorities, a company doesn't hire any (or a very small number). It's possible, but not likey, that in every instance, despite this diverse applicant pool, a white male always emeges as the most quailfied. In such an instance, an investigation can be triggered. Such a company will have to demonstrate how their selection processes worked to produce this outcome. If they can demonstrate this was fair, great. If not, then the discriminatory hiring practices you stated ("a company that sure as hell wouldn't consider hiring them") would be exposed.
To discourage a company selecting unqualified women and minorities just to avoid such an investigation, white males are also protected and can file claims if they feel the process was unfair towards them (I provided links to some examples of this earlier). I believe the ultimate discouragement of such behavior, however, is that in these days of cut-throat competition, overworked staff and tight budgets, what company can afford to put unqualified people into any role and keep them there? Certainly not the one I worked for.
Like any law or human-designed process, AA is not prefect. IMO however, on balance I feel it proves a more equitable playing field for everyone.
As a young british guy from a small town in the north east of England with a population of 140,000 I DONT KNOW WHAT TO THINK OF AMERICA.
I have been to the US twice. The first time I went to San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Las Vegas.
The second time I went to florida.
I have to say, both times I thought it was fabulous and since my last visit I have become obsessed with you guys across the pond!
What I want to know is what is it like to be American? What city are you in and what do you like about it?
My opinion about the UK, is that we only really have one spectacular city ; LONDON! When you get off the train at Kings Cross you are in awe? I guess New York is like that but are any other cities? Like Chicago? Boston? etc..
Just help me out, I know it's not a very clear question :s Just give me details on the topic!
I love america and hope to live there one day!
Take this from an American who's been living in Britain for over 15 years: there's a lot in between California and Florida. Most of it's worth seeing.
Start by camping under the stars in Southern Utah, you haven't seen awe until you've done that.
I meant there are hundreds that have experienced it, sorry about that.
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.
