Surely equality is simply best person for job 'irrespective ' of whatever minority or indeed majority they come from.
Yes, I think we're mostly agreed on that.
Pre - selection by attribute is the way many on line HR systems have gone. Managers doing pre selection without name/address/gender/ethnic origin. The reason being that bias is most likely at initial selection. As for sexual orientation who cares these days seriously.
Homophobic bullies care. Unfortunately still a few of them around.
Surely equality is simply best person for job 'irrespective ' of whatever minority or indeed majority they come from. Pre - selection by attribute is the way many on line HR systems have gone. Managers doing pre selection without name/address/gender/ethnic origin. The reason being that bias is most likely at initial selection. As for sexual orientation who cares these days seriously.
Not necessarily so, especially within government departments. In my 25+ years as a civil servant, I have seen and continue to see factors such as gender, race and sexuality all have a bearing on recruitment and promotion. It`s a standing joke that if you have a black lesbian apply for a position, they have immediately ticked three of the boxes that meet the selection criteria. It`s wrong but that`s the reality of it. Forms require job applicants to disclose race and sexuality but how is that relevant with all things supposedly being equal. It comes under the heading of "positive discrimination" but any form of discrimination undermines equality.
Homophobic bullies care. Unfortunately still a few of them around.
They should be dealt with under the disciplinary procedures. Sadly have had to deal with gays bullying gays. Outing someone who wasn't ready. This is best dealt with as a bullying issue rather than identifying it as a sexual orientation issue.
I think he's got a point ( ). Too many companies are using gay rights as a moral fig leaf and even the Tories are at it by using the threat of homophobic 'extremism' to extend the state's control over children.
However he falls into his usual trap of assuming that the LGBT 'movement' is just another branch of left-wing politics. I wonder how Owen feels about gay conservatives.
I'd also be interested to hear what his reaction would be to a big corporation which DIDN'T support gay rights.
Twitter tantrums!
It's all PR anyway. If companies started losing money and customers over their support of a particular issue I doubt they would pursue it for long.
Not necessarily so, especially within government departments. In my 25+ years as a civil servant, I have seen and continue to see factors such as gender, race and sexuality all have a bearing on recruitment and promotion. It`s a standing joke that if you have a black lesbian apply for a position, they have immediately ticked three of the boxes that meet the selection criteria. It`s wrong but that`s the reality of it. Forms require job applicants to disclose race and sexuality but how is that relevant with all things supposedly being equal. It comes under the heading of "positive discrimination" but any form of discrimination undermines equality.
Private firms wouldn't get away with it. We have to have paperwork to show that we haven't discriminated. Example cutting two jobs down to one. Robust selection procedure meant that a lady in recovery from cancer (working) would be redundant. As an employer we made decision to not reduce jobs as there was no way we could select the lady in cancer recovery over the better candidate but likewise it was inappropriate to sack cancer lady. She is now in remission. Better candidate has moved on.
They should be dealt with under the disciplinary procedures. Sadly have had to deal with gays bullying gays. Outing someone who wasn't ready. This is best dealt with as a bullying issue rather than identifying it as a sexual orientation issue.
Oh dear. Reading DS comments I was led to believe that homosexuality is a world full of love, respect and tolerance......
You will never have true equal rights until there is no need to ask the question. When it matters not a jot if the person is black or white, gay or straight, male or female. Because when we stop asking the question then it will be mean the question is irrelevant.
Discrimination is a multi-million pound industry so ambulance chasing lawyers will make sure its never irrelevant
If I was owner of a large corporation, it would probably be seen to be supporting gay rights, simply because I want gay people to spend their money and buy my products and services.
If I was owner of a large corporation, it would probably be seen to be supporting gay rights, simply because I want gay people to spend their money and buy my products and services.
It does not seem to have affected Dolce & Gabbana after their dubious comments.
Outside of recognising the value of the pink pound and what diversity can bring to an organisation in terms of productivity, a corporate entity has no business in intervening in the rights of man.
They exist within the macroeconomic paradigm they operate in. Enacting social change of any form can't be an objective due to the very capitalist nature of the beast.
Why would they need to say it? Isn't that what normally happens?
Not necessarily. Stonewall's Diversity Champions programme (what nuances can be contained in that name) has an extremely detailed programme of when companies and organisations are measured as Diversity Champions. This awards some merit for the existence of openly gay people in the top three tiers of staff in the company and expects and encourages the companies to monitor sexual orientation of their employees. If the best is what you want then you do not need the Stonewall to tell you how to get the best, keep the best and deal with the best. If the best is a gay man, you employ him and ensure he is happy in his employment.
EDIT I should have added if a company cannot find a gay man of merit to employ in one of the top tiers then the programme is there to pressurise the company into employing a gay man of lesser merit to meet the criteria.
Outside of recognising the value of the pink pound and what diversity can bring to an organisation in terms of productivity, a corporate entity has no business in intervening in the rights of man.
They exist within the macroeconomic paradigm they operate in. Enacting social change of any form can't be an objective due to the very capitalist nature of the beast.
If your target customer is the straight population what value has the pink pound and why should a company seek diversity as an end in itself as opposed to just employing the best. If diversity is a positive influence then that indicates that different people have different skills dependant on their characteristics?
If your target customer is the straight population what value has the pink pound
The value is profit
and why should a company seek diversity as an end in itself as opposed to just employing the best. If diversity is a positive influence then that indicates that different people have different skills dependant on their characteristics?
They don't need to seek diversity as an end to itself, they seek profit and investment to return ratios.
Organisations don't employ people with just 1 skill, they require a range of skills, inevitably those people will be different and have different characteristics. Doppelgangers don't exist.
Not necessarily so, especially within government departments. In my 25+ years as a civil servant, I have seen and continue to see factors such as gender, race and sexuality all have a bearing on recruitment and promotion. It`s a standing joke that if you have a black lesbian apply for a position, they have immediately ticked three of the boxes that meet the selection criteria. It`s wrong but that`s the reality of it. Forms require job applicants to disclose race and sexuality but how is that relevant with all things supposedly being equal. It comes under the heading of "positive discrimination" but any form of discrimination undermines equality.
Having spent 19 years working for a London council through the 90s and 00s,the positive discrimination,in recruitment, was overwhelming.
It got so ridiculous,minorities would show up for "full time" positions,demanding part time hours,and they often got away with it.
Bloody madness
In the UK of 2015, there only seems to be two groups of people who won't stop talking about how important sexual orientation is, the anti-gay bigots and the minority of gay people who, as you say abuse their minority status for personal gain.
Society is getting better, problems won't end overnight but the progress has been swift in recent years.
it's going too quickly for some and what they don't need is aggressive reactions to them. All it took to bring my elder relatives to change their mindsets was gentle persuasion via discussion and meeting gay people, rather than the extreme of people chanting "we're here, we're queer" getting in their faces. *
* I'll probably clarify this later as I'm on a phone at the moment. Basically; softly softly catchy monkey is preferable to some of the more aggressive campaigning we have seen. *Cough *Perer Tachell *cough*
I am in complete agreement, my grandparents had to go through a similar process. Fortunately I wasn't the only gay in the family, someone had come before me and layed the ground work.
Me and my husband don't live a flamboyantly, we tend to keep our relationship private. We are just like every other couple. Neither of us asks for special treatment if we go anywhere, we don't even fill in the "equal oppurtunites" part on application forms.
I have to be fair to my grandparent who are in their 80s. They have seen such vast change through the years, telephone, mobile, computer the list goes on. I personally don't view someone as bigoted if homosexual relationships leaves them uncomfortable, people of my grandparents generation have seen the world change so much and so quickly. Its obvious they need time to catch their breath if you will.
The last 10 years has seen such fundamental change for LGBT people. What concerns me is the anarchists and zealots....they hijack movements to suit their own cause. They have the same thinking as feminists whom I am not keen on either. Both groups have a go at you just because you may think or feel differently, then comes the hostility, ill willl and aggression.
Pride events throughout the country have lost the meaning of these events. They are commercial operation and cock show, each major event is competing asgainst one another. Gone are the days when artists would do pride festivals for free recognising its for a good cause.
Any minority that abuses their status should be chewed up and spat out. I don't believe in positive discrimination, its still prejudice no matter what.
Our lifestyle is fairly simple, we don't have a lot of gay friends which I think makes life easier. Most are in longterm relationships like us, a few have kids, yet we're all on the same page in that we would rather have dinner and a few glasses of vimto.
TBH I hope we get back to the situation where people are hired for their abilities not for which minority they belong to.
Comments
Homophobic bullies care. Unfortunately still a few of them around.
Not necessarily so, especially within government departments. In my 25+ years as a civil servant, I have seen and continue to see factors such as gender, race and sexuality all have a bearing on recruitment and promotion. It`s a standing joke that if you have a black lesbian apply for a position, they have immediately ticked three of the boxes that meet the selection criteria. It`s wrong but that`s the reality of it. Forms require job applicants to disclose race and sexuality but how is that relevant with all things supposedly being equal. It comes under the heading of "positive discrimination" but any form of discrimination undermines equality.
They should be dealt with under the disciplinary procedures. Sadly have had to deal with gays bullying gays. Outing someone who wasn't ready. This is best dealt with as a bullying issue rather than identifying it as a sexual orientation issue.
Twitter tantrums!
It's all PR anyway. If companies started losing money and customers over their support of a particular issue I doubt they would pursue it for long.
Private firms wouldn't get away with it. We have to have paperwork to show that we haven't discriminated. Example cutting two jobs down to one. Robust selection procedure meant that a lady in recovery from cancer (working) would be redundant. As an employer we made decision to not reduce jobs as there was no way we could select the lady in cancer recovery over the better candidate but likewise it was inappropriate to sack cancer lady. She is now in remission. Better candidate has moved on.
Oh dear. Reading DS comments I was led to believe that homosexuality is a world full of love, respect and tolerance......
No you weren't, don't tell porkies!
Discrimination is a multi-million pound industry so ambulance chasing lawyers will make sure its never irrelevant
Dammit! I just could not decide which smiley to use ;-)
What have ambulances got to do with sexual orientation?
It does not seem to have affected Dolce & Gabbana after their dubious comments.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/15/dolce-and-gabbana-gay-families_n_6872710.html
If you don't understand the term I'm not explaining it
I think he meant that the noise the sirens make on some of them are a bit, er, well,......... camp ???:D
Is everybody on here thick and doesn't know what the term ambulance chasing lawyers means
They exist within the macroeconomic paradigm they operate in. Enacting social change of any form can't be an objective due to the very capitalist nature of the beast.
Thick ? Undoubtedly, but some of us are not devoid of a sense of humour.
Well done, that man, for posting irrefutable proof of the point I was making ! ( even it it does make you appear thick ) ;-)
Not necessarily. Stonewall's Diversity Champions programme (what nuances can be contained in that name) has an extremely detailed programme of when companies and organisations are measured as Diversity Champions. This awards some merit for the existence of openly gay people in the top three tiers of staff in the company and expects and encourages the companies to monitor sexual orientation of their employees. If the best is what you want then you do not need the Stonewall to tell you how to get the best, keep the best and deal with the best. If the best is a gay man, you employ him and ensure he is happy in his employment.
EDIT I should have added if a company cannot find a gay man of merit to employ in one of the top tiers then the programme is there to pressurise the company into employing a gay man of lesser merit to meet the criteria.
If your target customer is the straight population what value has the pink pound and why should a company seek diversity as an end in itself as opposed to just employing the best. If diversity is a positive influence then that indicates that different people have different skills dependant on their characteristics?
The value is profit
They don't need to seek diversity as an end to itself, they seek profit and investment to return ratios.
Organisations don't employ people with just 1 skill, they require a range of skills, inevitably those people will be different and have different characteristics. Doppelgangers don't exist.
Having spent 19 years working for a London council through the 90s and 00s,the positive discrimination,in recruitment, was overwhelming.
It got so ridiculous,minorities would show up for "full time" positions,demanding part time hours,and they often got away with it.
Bloody madness
I am in complete agreement, my grandparents had to go through a similar process. Fortunately I wasn't the only gay in the family, someone had come before me and layed the ground work.
Me and my husband don't live a flamboyantly, we tend to keep our relationship private. We are just like every other couple. Neither of us asks for special treatment if we go anywhere, we don't even fill in the "equal oppurtunites" part on application forms.
I have to be fair to my grandparent who are in their 80s. They have seen such vast change through the years, telephone, mobile, computer the list goes on. I personally don't view someone as bigoted if homosexual relationships leaves them uncomfortable, people of my grandparents generation have seen the world change so much and so quickly. Its obvious they need time to catch their breath if you will.
The last 10 years has seen such fundamental change for LGBT people. What concerns me is the anarchists and zealots....they hijack movements to suit their own cause. They have the same thinking as feminists whom I am not keen on either. Both groups have a go at you just because you may think or feel differently, then comes the hostility, ill willl and aggression.
Pride events throughout the country have lost the meaning of these events. They are commercial operation and cock show, each major event is competing asgainst one another. Gone are the days when artists would do pride festivals for free recognising its for a good cause.
Any minority that abuses their status should be chewed up and spat out. I don't believe in positive discrimination, its still prejudice no matter what.
Our lifestyle is fairly simple, we don't have a lot of gay friends which I think makes life easier. Most are in longterm relationships like us, a few have kids, yet we're all on the same page in that we would rather have dinner and a few glasses of vimto.
TBH I hope we get back to the situation where people are hired for their abilities not for which minority they belong to.