Affirmative Action the poll!

[CountDeMoney]

I am, as well, because there are tangible benefits from having a more diverse workforce, student body, etc. 

Like what?

Like crackers like you learning not to have to ask a stupid ass question like that.

[derspiess]

voted yes. not surprised one bit that languish votes no

I voted yes, of course.

For everyone that voted NO ZOMG AFF ACSHUN IS SO EVOL, ask yourself if you'd rather be black.  That includes you, garbon.

Solid argument.  I'd rather not be Asian.  Or Canadian.  Or Mormon.  Should they get affirmative action, just the same?

[Ideologue]

I'd rather be Canadian.

[derspiess]

I'd rather be Canadian.

Then by all means, go be one.

[Razgovory]

I'd rather be Canadian.

Then by all means, go be one.

They probably won't let him practice law either.

[Ideologue]

I'd rather be Canadian.

Then by all means, go be one.

And abandon the country I love to anarchists?

[LaCroix]

hey, ideologue, does raz hate you too because he's in love with korea and your relationship with her went sour?

I voted yes, of course.

of course, because you understand the plight of the negro

[Martinus]

To answer some of the earlier responses to my posts: of course I'd hire someone who comes to a job interview wearing a suit and doesnt have ghetto manners over the opposite. How fucked up you have to be to argue otherwise??

[Martinus]

The bottom line is that: job recruitment is not about fixing social wrongs or reducing inequalities or "giving chances". It's about getting the best person for the job.

[Richard Hakluyt]

My response was dictated by Raz's initial post, where he says that he is thinking about quotas in the main. I am not in favour of quotas.

But I believe that affirmative action can easily result in an increase in the pool of people we are drawing from and thus enhance the chances of getting the best person for the job. In the past, in the UK, the best person for any of the good jobs more or less had to be white, male and middle class.........heh, go back a bit further and he had to be CofE. By being more pluralist we have increased the pool of talent from which we can draw.

Of course it should not just be a matter of employers broadening their recruitment horizons. The state school system in England is far too relaxed about table manners and accents nowadays (and other such social skills), you are not going to get a good job if you speak like a Jamaican gangster and can't handle a knife and a fork. It is an incredibly false thing to say that all cultures and subcultures are equally valid, conforming to mainstream mores can be a bloody bore at times, but being excluded is far worse.

[dps]

I'd rather be Canadian.

Then by all means, go be one.

And abandon the country I love to anarchists?

Too late to worry about that one--the Soviet Union is no more.

[CountDeMoney]

The bottom line is that: job recruitment is not about ... "giving chances". It's about getting the best person for the job.

Sure it's about giving chances.  The best person for the job isn't always the best person for the job.

[Martinus]

Well, I work in a very "people" business, i.e. where human capital is most important. We are big  on diversity but it is less about recruiting people from minorities to give them "a chance" and more about reaching out to brilliant people of any color, race, creed or sexuality and for example funding sponsored stipends for them. That way by the time these people reach recruitable age, they are already molded in a way we need them.

Recruiting lawyers with ghetto accents would be a disaster. We need to work to get them out of the ghetto when they can still be changed.

[Martinus]

And background culture matters. As I have already said many times before, Poland is as culturally homogenous as they come but culture/class still matters. At an entry level hardworking people is what we need but later acculturation becomes important. I have two younger colleagues at work in my team and they are good lawyers and hardworking people, but they are somewhat "uncouth" for lack of a better word. And it's a problem. Clients complain, they are not presentable etc. I have also even younger colleagues from more privileged backgrounds - and clients prefer to work with them because they carry themselves with the right amount of confidence and demeanour that is expected of them. This may sound elitist but that's the truth - and the younger ones probably will end up being promoted faster because they tick all the boxes so to speak.

[Martinus]

And before someone asks - yes we try very hard to develop the "uncouth" ones but there is an amazing level of internal resistance to changing one's cultural behaviour like this. And telling someone they make too much noise when eating or should get a haircut more often is surprisingly more difficult (not to mention, difficult to follow) than telling someone they should refresh their knowledge of the Civil Code.