Chip

iTrader: (3)

I thought some people on here might like to give their opinion of my stance on "positive discrimination" and why I think its ultimately bad for the very people it tries to help.





Lets set the scene with an example.



On interviewing a random selection of officers within fairtowns police force, I observe that there is a low level of racial hatred among the white officers, in fact most view the few black officers within the force as good officers.



There are 100 jobs in fairtown police force going.

1000 applicants apply
900 of the applicants are white
100 of the applicants are black

Fairtown has just introduced a positive discrimination policy to try and ensure proportional representation within the police force, as a result, it needs to make sure that of the 100 new recruits it takes on
50 are black
50 are white


The applicants that apply, black and white both have an equal distribution of suitable and unsuitable people, 10% of the applicants in this case.

So there are
90 suitable white candidates out of 900
10 suitable black candidates out of 100


The jobs are given though in line with fairtowns policy as such:
50 of the jobs go to suitable white candidates
10 of the jobs to to suitable black candidates
40 of the jobs go to unsuitable black candidates


After 3 years, the candidates are looked at, and it is found that on average:
the 50 white officers have had 3 promotions or special assignments each
the 10 suitable black officers have also had 3 promotions or special assignments each
the 40 unsuitable black officers, taken on to make things fair though, have had no promotions or special assignments.

Fairtown is condemened in the press for holding back black officers



After another 3 years, in line with fairtowns new "equal promotion prospects" rules, all of the officers have now had the same number of promotions and special assignments, as a result the black officers, 80% of whom are unsuitable have become known within the force as being mainly useless and incompetant, white officers assigned to the 4 black senior officers who are useless at their jobs resent the fact that incompetant people have been promoted beyong them.




On interviewing a random selection of officers within fairtowns police force, I observe that there is a high level of racial hatred among the white officers, who view their black colleagues as a liability to the force.


Congratulations, the policies put in place to remove the low level of racism have succeeded in turning it into a high level of racism.




So is my example how you view the effects of "positive discimination" too, or do you think it has some big flaws where I have misunderstood the subject?

1.9 xr2 on 40's

seems logical to me

Coldo

I agree.

Although lets be honest, in a couple of generations we (whites) will be the minority in this country so fingers crossed procedures like the above are still in place so my grandkids can get jobs!

1.9 xr2 on 40's

the setting out not the daft sequence of events
this is the fuckt world we live in,

the bnp would have it thats for sure

Rick Astley

My belief has and always will be... You choose the best person for the job regardless of race, creed, sexuality or religion.

I understand why you are asked about your orientation, religion and race but I don't understand why a white person can be immediately discounted purely on the basis of balancing numbers.

matts1

What makes me laugh is that we are told NOT to judge or treat someone different because of their colour and then...

The same people create criteria for employment numbers on the basis of colour?

jammerrs

me too, old or young, black or white, male or female, who is best should get the job

Chip

iTrader: (3)

Likewise, this is my point, the best people should get the job, its the ONLY way that you are ultimately being fair to anyone, if you give someone a job they dont deserve purely because it balances your books racially, you end up making that race seem incompetant!

The way to do it in the fairtown example above, would be to massively push advertising of the policeforce as an employer into the black areas, so that you get a higher number of black applicants and hence a higher number of black people to fill the jobs fairly, thats the only form of interference that any racial equality commity should be allowed, trying to encourage applicants and NOT trying to alter the results of a fair application process from there on in!

Chip

iTrader: (3)

Agreed, I dont want some 4' 11" asian female fire fighter trying to carry me out of a burning building, I want some black bloke built like a brick shithouse to do it instead

Rod-Tarry

She could always carry me out Chip dont rule her out cos shes small, Look at David Haye .

Chip

iTrader: (3)

LOL

He's a big bloke, 6'3 and nearly 16 stone, im sure he could happily carry most people out of a burning building, plus he has proved how fast he can run

1.9 xr2 on 40's

all the coppers round here seem to be 20 odd year old blondes

cant see anybody on the blag being scared of them
prob why kids get up to so much, big copper geezer giving you a slap for nickin sweets or some blond tart chasing you in a diesel mondeo cos you robbed a car with the keys after a burgle spree and you crash and do one and away

out of the both outcomes the sore lug is the worst but alas no longer possible

Dangerous Malcolm..

My take on 'positive discrimination' is it's just a legal form of racism on the majority population. It sucks.

C4llyT

I've never understood it either, want us all to be equal for a harmonious society, then you piss off the majority whilst helping the minority = majority resenting minority = fucked society.
Mind blowing their logic on things like this, just breeds contempt and inflames racism and racist views.

TWoods

Such policies not just in the police force, I thoroughly believe is basically institutionalised racism sugar coated in candy floss.

Chip

iTrader: (3)

Policeforce was just an example mate, lots of similar policies exist in other companies and institutions im sure.

cjwood555

When I was writing my equal opportunities policy I came across a 'model' police published by the commission for racial equality (or whatever they're called these days) which specifically included positive discrimination clauses - things to the effect of 'we will work towards a workforce which represents in equal proportion the make up of the community'.

So in Oxford or Guildford you would have a 90% white workforce whereas in brum you would have a 10-20% white workforce! In fact, if I applied that policy to myself as a single person company, I'd have to sack myself....lol

Thankfully such policies are NOT a legal requirement. The law as it stands is contained mainly in:

• Race Relations Act 1976
• Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000
• Local Government Acts 1988 and 1999
• Equal Pay Act 1970
• Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003

Chris

Chip

iTrader: (3)

You'd only have to sack 90% of yourself chris, they'd let you keep your arsehole on the books so they could carry on fucking it for tax

zetec-Sam

iTrader: (2)

Don't bring your fantasies into this chip

cjwood555

too true!

I completely agree with your chain of logic. Furthermore, even the 'proportional representation' approach in the model policies takes no account of the differing aspirations of each racial group. (Whilst it may be stereotypical to say this, stereotypes only come to exist as an impression of the general state of affairs). It would be fair to say that, running with the birmingham example:

Let's say, hypothetically, 30% of Birmingham residents are white, 30% are asian, 30% are black and 10% are polish.

- A vacancy for an office temp might see applications in the above proportions, given fair and reasonable advertising.
- A vacancy for a solictor could see a 60% white, 30% black, 9% asian and 1% polish applicants
- A vacancy for a sous-chef in an indian restaurant would see 95% asian applicants

That is not to say that there are no good Polish solicitors or that only an indian chef can make a curry base sauce, rather that the skill-sets, career ambitions and education levels of different races does vary. For example, Indian and Pakistani (men in particular) are often very entrepreneurial by nature, whereas the English are generally more subservient.

Therefore I would argue that it is to distort, influence and discriminate even to aim for proportional representation or encourage applications through advertising: Any would-be solicitor will be reading the same professional journals; any office temp will be registered with a number of agencies; and any sous-chef should be perfectly capable of using a web-site or reading a newspaper - REGARDLESS of race.

There is perhaps an argument that advertising by internet-only excludes members of poorer families, thus indirectly discriminating against the non-british who (in some areas, not all), make up a greater proportion of the unemployed. I would refute this on the basis that all towns operate a library with free internet access, most towns have a job-centre with easy-to-use computer systems, and many poorer areas have community centres/facilities offering the same.

One does have to be careful though - although positive discrimination isn't law (yet), the laws against racial discrimination are very broad and do include indirect discrimination, largely thanks to numerous judgements passed by PC-nervous courts which now stand as Tort....

Chris

rog

iTrader: (2)

Perfect example of making life too complicated, either they can/can't do the job, end of story, they shouldn't even need to segregate the candidates in the first place. Also this is flawed, IMO if your going to do it the way they did, then it should have been done like this,90 suitable white candidates out of 90010 suitable black candidates out of 100And thats where it should have stopped, no 50/50 split.

Chip

iTrader: (3)

Well said

TWoods

Thats reason for my comment from government offices to companies the nature of such policies IS racism in itself, there can never be unbiased resolution from such policy because to make the stats you have to turn a blind eye to sub-standard allowances. Nobody benefits and never true equality can arise from such policy.

Chip

iTrader: (3)

Indeed, you end up essentially proving that black people arent capable of doing the job, its horrifically unfair on the ethnic groups it is trying to help!

Psycho Warren

iTrader: (5)

And then it ends up as "fact" on a TV documentary that black people are thick and asians the brightest and then its segregation and aparthied all over again