The DEI thread

[Razgovory]

Eh, I read this.
https://thehub.ca/2024/06/03/elie-cantin-nantel-quebec-is-a-national-anomaly-why-the-socially-liberal-province-hasnt-gone-woke/

Well, half of it.

[The Minsky Moment]

Corporations and government didn't start hiring DEI consultants to design wheelchair access ramps or make their office more ergonomic for handicapped people.  We can drop that pretense right now.

A lot of DEI stuff went way overboard and tried to shame white people simply for being white, often accusing them of racism for daring to question false history.

Could I see some evidence that "Corporations and government" "went way overboard and tried to shame white people simply for being white, often accusing them of racism for daring to question false history?"  Note that Truth Social posts do not constitute evidence.

In my experience, in most places in the corporate world, DEI was mostly a slogan for paying lip service to caring about diversity without really doing much to further it. It's been a bit surreal watching magaworld work themselves into a fury over it, conjuring imaginary horrors.

[Solmyr]

The reason that the two sides will never convince the other is that they are not talking about the same thing. I have no idea what the folks on the right mean when they say "DEI." If they mean anything.

They mean "hiring someone other than white men".

[Syt]

John Stewart had an explanation in one of his interviews of an example of DEI during his original run of The Daily Show. They asked agents to send them prospective talent for their program. They got sent mostly white males. They had to stress that they want to see more male and minority talent in the options - not because they decided "we need x% female and x% black" people on the show or whatever, but to make sure they didn't miss out on someone good. Having more choice and encouraging applications from people who otherwise may feel they don't have a shot to apply is IMO improving meritocracy, not damaging it.

[Josquius]

The reason that the two sides will never convince the other is that they are not talking about the same thing. I have no idea what the folks on the right mean when they say "DEI." If they mean anything.

They mean "hiring someone other than white men".

Hello. White guy who got into university through EDI here.

[Admiral Yi]

That's not the objective of a DEI report, however.

Why are you addressing this to me instead of Squeeze?

[Sheilbh]

In my experience, in most places in the corporate world, DEI was mostly a slogan for paying lip service to caring about diversity without really doing much to further it. It's been a bit surreal watching magaworld work themselves into a fury over it, conjuring imaginary horrors.

Yes-ish.

I think that's broadly right in my experience of corporate world too. The two areas where I think there was a bit of an exception was around the affinity networks which did expand and I think had pros and cons on there own (from long experience in the legal LGBT+ network trenches ) but I think could sometimes fall out with other networks or within themselves - and because it's about identity people felt it deeply in a way that could be quite difficult. Also it did transform policies. One issue in the UK is that lots of companies relied on campaigning organisations, like Stonewall for example, to re-write various policies and on a whole range of issues those polices have not held up in court. I think there was a fair amount of non-lawyers writing policies for HR teams based on what they would like the law to be then slamming up against employment law - for example this has come up on "cancel culture" firings where broadly speaking it is not legal to fire someone in the UK for their political or philosophical beliefs (provided such beliefs are not "unworthy of respect in a democratic society").

I think it is interesting the extent to which corporate world appears to have u-turned on this.

I think DEI, in the UK at least, has a bigger impact in the various layers of government - so central state, local government, all the arms length bodies etc - and the charity sector. I think it has been really serious there and, under the Equality Act, there is a "public sector equality duty" which normally means working on equalities impact assessments - if I'm honest I'm not really sure that this has significantly improved public policy for the financial and time cost.

My big criticism of it as it's been implemented would often be that I think it has a blindspot for class and geography - but I get that may be a specific UK criticism. And I think more generally in the UK we have just adopted what was doing the rounds in the US so I mentioned before but an NHS Trust had all of its policies referring to "BIPOC" and I'm really, really not sure we should be looking to think about "indigineity" in Europe - I think it's important in the Americas and Australia but really, really unhelpful and potentially dangerous basically everywhere else.

Edit: And I'd add from my work with LGBT+ networks that DEI officers, as far as I can tell, do nothing The expectation was very much that we would organise a calendar of events and deliver them, write the comms, complete any submissions (such as the 1,000+ question Stonewall top 100 workplace survey). We had zero support from the DEI Director on a six figure salary - so I don't really know what they did if I'm honest.

[Grey Fox]

As far as I know DEI is strongly opposed in Quebec.

Or more simply, we are not consumed by the framing of the anglo-saxon world of social issues.

[Razgovory]

Corporations and government didn't start hiring DEI consultants to design wheelchair access ramps or make their office more ergonomic for handicapped people.  We can drop that pretense right now.

A lot of DEI stuff went way overboard and tried to shame white people simply for being white, often accusing them of racism for daring to question false history.

Could I see some evidence that "Corporations and government" "went way overboard and tried to shame white people simply for being white, often accusing them of racism for daring to question false history?"  Note that Truth Social posts do not constitute evidence.

In my experience, in most places in the corporate world, DEI was mostly a slogan for paying lip service to caring about diversity without really doing much to further it. It's been a bit surreal watching magaworld work themselves into a fury over it, conjuring imaginary horrors.

This is my understanding, and if true why fight so hard to defend it?

[Razgovory]

As far as I know DEI is strongly opposed in Quebec.

Or more simply, we are not consumed by the framing of the anglo-saxon world of social issues.

So it's not a human rights issue but rather just an Anglo-Saxon thing?

[crazy canuck]

Eh, I read this.
https://thehub.ca/2024/06/03/elie-cantin-nantel-quebec-is-a-national-anomaly-why-the-socially-liberal-province-hasnt-gone-woke/

Well, half of it.

My guess is you did a quick google search and were happy when you found an article in English about Quebec that had the term DEI used in a negative context.  But if you read the reporters interpretation of what the motion was, you will understand it was not a rejection of DEI. No DEI programs in any Canadian provinces have a quota system. And so the motion was simply in keeping with Quebec provincial laws, which by the way, are entirely consistent with DEI principles are, in my view, the strongest statutory supports for those principles in the Country.

This seems to be another example of a misunderstanding of what DEI is both my the author of the article and you.

[crazy canuck]

Corporations and government didn't start hiring DEI consultants to design wheelchair access ramps or make their office more ergonomic for handicapped people.  We can drop that pretense right now.

A lot of DEI stuff went way overboard and tried to shame white people simply for being white, often accusing them of racism for daring to question false history.

Could I see some evidence that "Corporations and government" "went way overboard and tried to shame white people simply for being white, often accusing them of racism for daring to question false history?"  Note that Truth Social posts do not constitute evidence.

In my experience, in most places in the corporate world, DEI was mostly a slogan for paying lip service to caring about diversity without really doing much to further it. It's been a bit surreal watching magaworld work themselves into a fury over it, conjuring imaginary horrors.

This is my understanding, and if true why fight so hard to defend it?

This is an important point, and one Grumbler already made in this thread, the problem with DEI has been its implementation, which has varied.

[Duque de Bragança]

As far as I know DEI is strongly opposed in Quebec.

Or more simply, we are not consumed by the framing of the anglo-saxon world of social issues.

So it's not a human rights issue but rather just an Anglo-Saxon thing?

Think of it an identity politics issue, US leftist-style, which is not an answer for the issues faced by other non-Anglo societies.

[Josquius]

.

This is my understanding, and if true why fight so hard to defend it?

The right are taking aim not just at shit ineffectual implementations of equality policies, but using DEI as a dog whistle for the entire concept of equality.
Big hints they're using it as a wedge to have a go at workers rights in general.

[crazy canuck]

As far as I know DEI is strongly opposed in Quebec.

Or more simply, we are not consumed by the framing of the anglo-saxon world of social issues.

So it's not a human rights issue but rather just an Anglo-Saxon thing?

Think of it an identity politics issue, US leftist-style, which is not an answer for the issues faced by other non-Anglo societies.

I think I would refine that a bit more and say non-Anglo societies that are not heavily influenced by American cultural norms.

In that way, you capture the parts of Canadian provinces that are not Trump light but also acknowledge that there are parts of Canadian provinces that are Maga world heavy.