Jump to content

Saints only Premier League club not to sign up to FA diversity code


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

Not sure what your point is. In sport generally the best players with the best attitude and application do make the top. There is no need for a quota in the England football team for example, 50% of them are black.

 

Just saying I don't believe in any discrimination but using sport as a way of changing systemic prejudice (racism or sexism) is not necessarily the right way to go. I was a protestor in 1981 because the Springboks were a racist team from a racist society at the time. Basically, we wanted them to  f@#* off.

What did you do Jeremy, burn your bra?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aintforever said:

I’m not a fan of positive discrimination but if discrimination on grounds of race or sex is already happening then maybe it’s a necessary evil?

 

What evidence do you have that discrimination is happening? Is it reality or is it perception? Do you not think giving someone a job because of their skin colour is also a form of discriminating? Do you think that giving someone under qualified a job because of their skin colour undermines the talents of those from minorities that do get jobs because of their talent?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

Not sure what your point is. In sport generally the best players with the best attitude and application do make the top. There is no need for a quota in the England football team for example, 50% of them are black.

 

Just saying I don't believe in any discrimination but using sport as a way of changing systemic prejudice (racism or sexism) is not necessarily the right way to go. I was a protestor in 1981 because the Springboks were a racist team from a racist society at the time. Basically, we wanted them to  f@#* off.

That was almost 30 years ago mate, it was a different world then. The reality is in most progressive  countries there is little discrimination, however much the loons like to pretend there is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

Not sure what your point is. In sport generally the best players with the best attitude and application do make the top. There is no need for a quota in the England football team for example, 50% of them are black.

50% ?  How should the football world go about correcting that over-representation?  Answers on a postcard.  

The result in personnel in whatever field you choose is never going to be an exact mirror representation of society and I don't think we should attempt to manufacture it so that it is.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aintforever said:

I don’t disagree but if people are being discriminated against and the law isn’t helping them I’m not sure how else you can get change.

Where is the discrimination in sport? Black people have excelled in many sports for many years and been given due recognition, on merit. Taking footy as an example, the proportion of black players as against the proportion of society suggests zero discrimination. 

Positive (or reverse) discrimination has no place for me 1. It's discrimination against people who are overlooked, on merit, just because they are the wrong colour. 2 Who would want a job knowing that they're probably not the best candidate, but a token appointment by virtue of their colour. Not healthy on any level. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys (Turkish and iansums) I'm agreeing with the general proposition that it's just PC to select any team based on some ideal of positive discrimination such as a quota system favouring some minority or a class of individuals who traditionally have been prejudiced. Sort out the system which is the cause, not the selection process and team profile which is a misguided effect. Walk it, don't talk it.

Edited by Jeremy
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Turkish said:

What evidence do you have that discrimination is happening? Is it reality or is it perception? Do you not think giving someone a job because of their skin colour is also a form of discriminating? Do you think that giving someone under qualified a job because of their skin colour undermines the talents of those from minorities that do get jobs because of their talent?

I’ve worked somewhere where the boss is a racist twat and, I quote: “wouldn’t hire Asians because they have a chip on their shoulder”. I’ve read numerous accounts of people who wouldn’t get an interview, then changed their name to something more ‘English’ then do. Even Boris Johnson said discrimination was a problem that needed sorting out so I guess there is some evidence.

i have no idea what the situation within football is like, maybe you should ask Paul Elliot?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, egg said:

Where is the discrimination in sport? Black people have excelled in many sports for many years and been given due recognition, on merit. Taking footy as an example, the proportion of black players as against the proportion of society suggests zero discrimination. 

Positive (or reverse) discrimination has no place for me 1. It's discrimination against people who are overlooked, on merit, just because they are the wrong colour. 2 Who would want a job knowing that they're probably not the best candidate, but a token appointment by virtue of their colour. Not healthy on any level. 

I would agree there isn’t much in business either. If people looked at the facts rather than whailing there aren’t enough black directors they’d see that 8% of directors in UK FTSE 100s are black, compared to 14% of the population. On the face of it underrepresented then factor in that the average age of a director is 54, yet the average age of an ethic minority is 39 then we are not comparing like for like. Just people getting upset about a problem that doesn’t really exist 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I’ve worked somewhere where the boss is a racist twat and, I quote: “wouldn’t hire Asians because they have a chip on their shoulder”. I’ve read numerous accounts of people who wouldn’t get an interview, then changed their name to something more ‘English’ then do. Even Boris Johnson said discrimination was a problem that needed sorting out so I guess there is some evidence.

i have no idea what the situation within football is like, maybe you should ask Paul Elliot?

So what did you do about your racist boss? Did you pull him up on it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Turkish said:

I would agree there isn’t much in business either. If people looked at the facts rather than whailing there aren’t enough black directors they’d see that 8% of directors in UK FTSE 100s are black, compared to 14% of the population. On the face of it underrepresented then factor in that the average age of a director is 54, yet the average age of an ethic minority is 39 then we are not comparing like for like. Just people getting upset about a problem that doesn’t really exist 

Yep. You could argue that the directors are under represented. On the flip, you could argue that footballers are over represented. That doesn't mean that white footballers aren't given a fair crack. It also doesn't mean that black people aren't being given a fair crack in the board room.

Reward talent on its merits, not colour. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I’ve worked somewhere where the boss is a racist twat and, I quote: “wouldn’t hire Asians because they have a chip on their shoulder”. I’ve read numerous accounts of people who wouldn’t get an interview, then changed their name to something more ‘English’ then do. Even Boris Johnson said discrimination was a problem that needed sorting out so I guess there is some evidence.

i have no idea what the situation within football is like, maybe you should ask Paul Elliot?

I work for an Asian. We have just promoted an Asian to partner. Our partners are 75% ethnic origin. All there on merit. 

Sure, racism exists in pockets.  Rewarding people on colour not merit will not help one bit and will build bigger divides than actually exist. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, egg said:

I work for an Asian. We have just promoted an Asian to partner. Our partners are 75% ethnic origin. All there on merit. 

Sure, racism exists in pockets.  Rewarding people on colour not merit will not help one bit and will build bigger divides than actually exist. 

 

Maybe. I’ve already said I’m not a fan of positive discrimination, mainly for the reasons you state. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, egg said:

I work for an Asian. We have just promoted an Asian to partner. Our partners are 75% ethnic origin. All there on merit. 

Sure, racism exists in pockets.  Rewarding people on colour not merit will not help one bit and will build bigger divides than actually exist. 

Edited by wadesmith
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like most of you think the FA should scrap the homegrown player requirements. That's a quota based on race. But in reality i'd guess most of you want to keep that one in place. Most FA's have it to encourage talent development from their own country, it serves a positive purpose. That's the key to any quota. Affirmative action has a place imo.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ultimatt said:

Sounds like most of you think the FA should scrap the homegrown player requirements. That's a quota based on race. But in reality i'd guess most of you want to keep that one in place. Most FA's have it to encourage talent development from their own country, it serves a positive purpose. That's the key to any quota. Affirmative action has a place imo.

 

Homegrown isn't based on race at all and it's nothing to do with "diversity".

Apart from that, great point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ultimatt said:

Sounds like most of you think the FA should scrap the homegrown player requirements. That's a quota based on race.

haha hardly! Heres a few homegrown players that have come through the EPL, im sure there are more :

Pogba

Fabregas

Lukaku

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, egg said:

I work for an Asian. We have just promoted an Asian to partner. Our partners are 75% ethnic origin. All there on merit. 

Sure, racism exists in pockets.  Rewarding people on colour not merit will not help one bit and will build bigger divides than actually exist. 

 

Doesnt sound too diverse 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ultimatt said:

Sounds like most of you think the FA should scrap the homegrown player requirements. That's a quota based on race. But in reality i'd guess most of you want to keep that one in place. Most FA's have it to encourage talent development from their own country, it serves a positive purpose. That's the key to any quota. Affirmative action has a place imo.

 

No one gives a shit about your opinion when you clearly have no idea what your talking about 😂😂 doughnut. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SKD said:

No one gives a shit about your opinion when you clearly have no idea what your talking about 😂😂 doughnut. 

wow, who's the fool? The homegrown quota was part of the FA's Elite Player Performance Plan.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160422012902/http://www.premierleague.com/content/premierleague/en-gb/youth/elite-player-performance-plan.html

""When you strip it down to its most fundamental, the EPPP is about creating an environment where a local boy, developed in his local club from eight or nine years of age, can go on to pull on a first-team shirt of the club that he has grown up at.

"This is every boy's dream and, while in reality only a lucky few will achieve it, the EPPP for all its focus on the science of elite development sets out to ensure that this dream can remain a reality for the next generation of young players.""

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ultimatt said:

Sounds like most of you think the FA should scrap the homegrown player requirements. That's a quota based on race. But in reality i'd guess most of you want to keep that one in place. Most FA's have it to encourage talent development from their own country, it serves a positive purpose. That's the key to any quota. Affirmative action has a place imo.

 

Homegrown player requirements having nothing whatsoever to do with race. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Ultimatt said:

wow, who's the fool? The homegrown quota was part of the FA's Elite Player Performance Plan.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160422012902/http://www.premierleague.com/content/premierleague/en-gb/youth/elite-player-performance-plan.html

""When you strip it down to its most fundamental, the EPPP is about creating an environment where a local boy, developed in his local club from eight or nine years of age, can go on to pull on a first-team shirt of the club that he has grown up at.

"This is every boy's dream and, while in reality only a lucky few will achieve it, the EPPP for all its focus on the science of elite development sets out to ensure that this dream can remain a reality for the next generation of young players.""

 

Where's the bit about it being a quota based on race? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

44 minutes ago, Ultimatt said:

wow, who's the fool? The homegrown quota was part of the FA's Elite Player Performance Plan.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160422012902/http://www.premierleague.com/content/premierleague/en-gb/youth/elite-player-performance-plan.html

""When you strip it down to its most fundamental, the EPPP is about creating an environment where a local boy, developed in his local club from eight or nine years of age, can go on to pull on a first-team shirt of the club that he has grown up at.

"This is every boy's dream and, while in reality only a lucky few will achieve it, the EPPP for all its focus on the science of elite development sets out to ensure that this dream can remain a reality for the next generation of young players.""

 

I haven't read the link but I bet it doesn't say only white home grown. Home grown could be skin of any colour!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Where's the bit about it being a quota based on race? 

I believe the intent is to develop more English players. That's why I said "based on" rather than "is". If the rule didn't exist, do you think the number of English players would be the same or less? In the Bundesliga it's explicitly stated, each club needs to have 12 German players. The EPL rule is more lax but imo still increases the number of English players getting games or at least contracts.

It's part of the broader EPPP to better develop young English players and hopefully create more English professional footballers.

https://www.goalreports.com/EPLPlan.pdf

"When analysing the contact time for players being coached in competing European clubs, the data shows that players in European clubs can receive up to twice as much formal coaching and practice than players in the English system. As a result, when English clubs come to make decisions to offer scholarships or contracts, English boys will typically have had significantly less opportunity to practice. Unless clubs have taken local action to enhance their programmes, these players are placed at a distinct disadvantage to their European counterparts."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, saintquin said:

 

I haven't read the link but I bet it doesn't say only white home grown. Home grown could be skin of any colour!  

Ah sorry. When I say Race I mean Ethnicity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Turkish said:

What evidence do you have that discrimination is happening? Is it reality or is it perception? Do you not think giving someone a job because of their skin colour is also a form of discriminating? Do you think that giving someone under qualified a job because of their skin colour undermines the talents of those from minorities that do get jobs because of their talent?

Your strawman edifice needs some work.  Still, if it makes you happy to invent stuff to get furious in your own head, be my guest.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Jeremy said:

Guys (Turkish and iansums) I'm agreeing with the general proposition that it's just PC to select any team based on some ideal of positive discrimination such as a quota system favouring some minority or a class of individuals who traditionally have been prejudiced. Sort out the system which is the cause, not the selection process and team profile which is a misguided effect. Walk it, don't talk it.

Could you not argue that because of their quotas, even though they took a dip for a while, that positive discrimination led to more black kids being interested in the sport (because they saw more people from their backgrounds playing, and therefore didn't assume it was off limits to them), and eventually leading to an even better team in future? Because now they have a bigger/better talent pool as a result of black people playing rugby? I'm not a follower of rugby but you said they are current world champions, so it hasn't really done them any harm in the long run has it?

While I do understand some of the criticisms here, and even share some of the views, my general impression is there is a massive lack of empathy from people who have never had to face such (negative) discrimination themselves. Reminds me a little bit of when people criticise benefits cheats or hungry kids whose parents have just upgraded their Sky TV. Of course there are cases where people are either undeserving or exaggerating their difficulties, but what about all the people who are genuinely struggling? Let's throw them all under the bus to make sure no-one can 'abuse the system' shall we? I do find it a bit annoying how the world jumps on the bandwagon for things that are much more serious in the US, but anyone who thinks the UK doesn't have any problem with racism and other forms of discrimination is kidding themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the 'virtue signaling' that takes place these days is nauseating in the extreme.  It is not what you say, it's what you do that counts: and Saints are way ahead of the game in terms of meeting diversity goals without having to shout it from the rooftops.  

Judge people on their actions not what they say.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Verbal said:

Your strawman edifice needs some work.  Still, if it makes you happy to invent stuff to get furious in your own head, be my guest.  

Talking of furious your wife would be absolutely livid with you if she caught you posting on here after you promised her you never would again. Guess this place matters more to you than her.

Edited by Turkish
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ultimatt said:

I believe the intent is to develop more English players. That's why I said "based on" rather than "is". If the rule didn't exist, do you think the number of English players would be the same or less? In the Bundesliga it's explicitly stated, each club needs to have 12 German players. The EPL rule is more lax but imo still increases the number of English players getting games or at least contracts.

It's part of the broader EPPP to better develop young English players and hopefully create more English professional footballers.

https://www.goalreports.com/EPLPlan.pdf

"When analysing the contact time for players being coached in competing European clubs, the data shows that players in European clubs can receive up to twice as much formal coaching and practice than players in the English system. As a result, when English clubs come to make decisions to offer scholarships or contracts, English boys will typically have had significantly less opportunity to practice. Unless clubs have taken local action to enhance their programmes, these players are placed at a distinct disadvantage to their European counterparts."

 

Right so it's a policy that doesn't discriminate on the basis of ethnicity or race (since its open to all young players as long as they start at a club early enough) but one consequence of the policy is that it is hoped that English youngsters will be given more of a chance. How is that in anyway similar to a quota system that mandates discrimination based on race and gender? I'm all for policies that give opportunities so that the best can succeed regardless of gender or sex, these policies are explicit about their discrimination and that's why it's markedly different from the homegrown policies. 

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, washsaint said:

All of the 'virtue signaling' that takes place these days is nauseating in the extreme.  It is not what you say, it's what you do that counts: and Saints are way ahead of the game in terms of meeting diversity goals without having to shout it from the rooftops.  

Judge people on their actions not what they say.

Absolutely, but if "virtue signalling" encourages other people to be better, is it something to feel particularly nauseous about? More nauseous that the original problem? It seems common nowadays to dismiss anyone trying to raise awareness about issues as "virtue signalling". While it no doubt exists and some examples are irritating, there's also a lot of people out there doing a lot more (even if it is 'just words') than others - including me! - to improve other people's lives, and writing them off as do-gooders or virtue signallers is just a comfort to one's own laziness, apathy or prejudice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, saintquin said:

Any club would stupid to not employ a person that would make that club better on the grounds of colour, race, religious beliefs or any other reason. Bar someone who wishes to harm to others!

Spot on. However, unfortunately, this quota is going to force that to happen. 
 

it’s going to come to a point where a highly qualified white man isn’t going to get a job (or potentially lose a job) because clubs need to fill a quota and tick a few boxes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SKD said:

Spot on. However, unfortunately, this quota is going to force that to happen. 
 

it’s going to come to a point where a highly qualified white man isn’t going to get a job (or potentially lose a job) because clubs need to fill a quota and tick a few boxes. 

That's fine, totally understand that argument and of course in isolation I agree with the sentiment. However, what if a highly qualified black woman doesn't get a job because clubs DON'T have to fill a quota and therefore give it to someone else - because even though she appears to be qualified, is she really going to fit in with the 'culture' in the office? She might have the grades, but she doesn't sound that intelligent with that accent... Sounds like she has read up on the club, but (being a woman) it all sounds a bit forced, she doesn't come across as a 'natural' follower of the industry etc.

It works both ways, but so many of the comments on this thread only look at it from one angle.

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, mrfahaji said:

That's fine, totally understand that argument and of course in isolation I agree with the sentiment. However, what if a highly qualified black woman doesn't get a job because clubs DON'T have to fill a quota and therefore give it to someone else - because even though she appears to be qualified, is she really going to fit in with the 'culture' in the office? She might have the grades, but she doesn't sound that intelligent with that accent... Sounds like she has read up on the club, but (being a woman) it all sounds a bit forced, she doesn't come across as a 'natural' follower of the industry etc.

Just my twopenneth but in my experience of working within various businesses is that typically the employer wants someone who convinces them they are capable of fulfilling the role well and preferably at a competitive wage.  Appearance or background is not an issue on the floor or at interview.  Business really isn't interested.

I have witnessed circumstances that could be described as discriminatory in my time though:  Firstly a banking software company (London) who, at the time, made no secret of the fact they were wary of giving serious, long term projects to women of child bearing age for fear that they would suddenly drop the project to have kids at short notice.  Secondly a large commercial landlord and property developer (London) who employed staff at interview as I laid it out above, but once employed, tended to look to nurture and promote those who fitted a certain cultural/religious background.  Didn't bother me much though, I was getting paid a fair wage and was treated well.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting thread because many posts are thoughtful, even if I disagree with them. There's no right answer or panacea to the way people are or how they think. There's always going to be political arguments about social and distributive justice. I am largely centre-left but I'm also not an apologist for historically bad stuff perpetrated by caucasians (of which I am a member). I had no say in what's happened in the past so I'm not responsible for it.  Over here, for example, there is a myth from social marxists that Maori were some unified race who lived together in peace. Think again - they really dealt to each other and it was the introduction of missionary Christianity that eventually tamed that (but only after the musket wars when some Maori tribes got muskets and "settled" inter-tribal grievances). Incidentally, this is where the haka originated from. That said, I also believe in fairness now and for the future.  Many things in the past were unfair. That needs to change. How, is the question for me. Personally, going back to the first post in this thread, having a quota system in sport is not the way to go. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

This is an interesting thread because many posts are thoughtful, even if I disagree with them. There's no right answer or panacea to the way people are or how they think. There's always going to be political arguments about social and distributive justice. I am largely centre-left but I'm also not an apologist for historically bad stuff perpetrated by caucasians (of which I am a member). I had no say in what's happened in the past so I'm not responsible for it.  Over here, for example, there is a myth from social marxists that Maori were some unified race who lived together in peace. Think again - they really dealt to each other and it was the introduction of missionary Christianity that eventually tamed that (but only after the musket wars when some Maori tribes got muskets and "settled" inter-tribal grievances). Incidentally, this is where the haka originated from. That said, I also believe in fairness now and for the future.  Many things in the past were unfair. That needs to change. How, is the question for me. Personally, going back to the first post in this thread, having a quota system in sport is not the way to go. 

"tamed" ffs.

Missionary Christianity of course having such a spotless historical record when it comes to not engaging in territorial conquest and genocide.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Verlaine - you've got to know about local history first and, yes, "tamed" is probably the right word contextually in the sense of subduing a general proclivity towards aggression and innate warring qualities. Also, for the record, I'm not religious at all.

I agree that much destruction was caused by missionary christianity. But not all missionary christianity was destricutive ie some of it was constructive. There is an argument for that case in at least parts of NZ. You'd have to google this but some of those missionaries were instrumental for the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi between Maori and the Crown which, again, was partly motivated by a desire to avoid the genocide that was inflicted on Australian Aborigines at about the same time (especially Tasmania). I imagine some Australian posters on here may object to this generalisation. Again, contextual.

Anyway, I gave it a shot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Ultimatt said:

hardly? Mostly.

 

18 hours ago, Ultimatt said:

Ah sorry. When I say Race I mean Ethnicity.

🙄🙄

Any good to see Saints are already doing their bit and the rest of the league need to catch up to our 'standards'. Even looking at the FB links to this most fans can see past the headline trying to make us look like racists.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Football should be used as an example of meritocracy, it’s such a results driven business clubs would employ a three headed alien if it got them results and trophies (and profit) . Ridiculous to suggest there is a racist conspiracy to keep BAME people out , even if Sol Campbell thinks so. 
when are we going to address lack of representation of white people in team GB sprint teams ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I always finds interesting is that the clamour for representation is only seen at the very top and with the most prestigious jobs. I haven't seen any widespread campaign to increase the number of women on oil rigs or bame representation in the rubbish collecting business. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, saintquin said:

Don't seem to be any other clubs fans find a problem with this. Had a look at a few other forums and can't see anything about this anywhere.

Don't know what that means but just thought I'd mention it!

I expect that's because we are then only prem club who haven't signed up so it's more of a talking point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

What I always finds interesting is that the clamour for representation is only seen at the very top and with the most prestigious jobs. I haven't seen any widespread campaign to increase the number of women on oil rigs or bame representation in the rubbish collecting business. 

True. I don’t see many black or Asian road crew workers when driving down the motorway, don’t see many that are bricklayers or hod carriers either. Surely we should be doing all we can to encourage these ladies gents and non binaries that these jobs keep the country going and are even more important than prestigious company director jobs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Jeremy said:

@ Verlaine - you've got to know about local history first and, yes, "tamed" is probably the right word contextually in the sense of subduing a general proclivity towards aggression and innate warring qualities. Also, for the record, I'm not religious at all.

I agree that much destruction was caused by missionary christianity. But not all missionary christianity was destricutive ie some of it was constructive. There is an argument for that case in at least parts of NZ. You'd have to google this but some of those missionaries were instrumental for the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi between Maori and the Crown which, again, was partly motivated by a desire to avoid the genocide that was inflicted on Australian Aborigines at about the same time (especially Tasmania). I imagine some Australian posters on here may object to this generalisation. Again, contextual.

Anyway, I gave it a shot.

Sounds like the “they were just savages before we took over their country” excuse for colonialism. Still a great divide in NZ from my own visits . How many Maori MPs are there , more than native Australia MPs in Australia?

Edited by East Kent Saint
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lived in south africa for 4yrs where they have ethnic quota's in the work place, whilst its not the same as being discussed but for illustration purposes of where this could lead to.

It went in order of priority to be considered for roles and dependant on your company there had to be certain quota's filled  in your org (i.e so you couldnt consider them all then just employ a white dude)

  1. Black woman
  2. Black Man
  3. Coloured woman
  4. Coloured man
  5. White women
  6. White man
  7. Foreigner

the real life problem is having someone who is either promoted into a position or recruited into a position based on their race who is not up to the role and is incompetent but still is employed, they become impossible to sack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

What I always finds interesting is that the clamour for representation is only seen at the very top and with the most prestigious jobs. 

Not true.  Unless you are counting the Police as one of the top jobs in the country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Turkish said:

True. I don’t see many black or Asian road crew workers when driving down the motorway, don’t see many that are bricklayers or hod carriers either. Surely we should be doing all we can to encourage these ladies gents and non binaries that these jobs keep the country going and are even more important than prestigious company director jobs. 

I've seen plenty of black and Asian road crew and manual construction workers.  Seriously, give your head a shake. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})