Quote:
Originally Posted by Escapee
I would guess that any case of discrimination follows the route of (A) someone reporting it (B) suitable organisation investigating it (C) A case put together to go to court.
|
Yes, that's the theory - except (C) which would usually be expected to have been a tribunal case before reaching court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escapee
Unfortunately there are organisations who channel lots of effort into discrimination against certain groups, but these same organisations would not see fit to do the reverse.
Me 'Knowing' and someone 'Proving' would need to involve an organisation that deal with racial discrimination, is there such an organisation that would be interested in white men of UK origin being descriminated against, I think not it would just be brushed under the carpet as positive discrimination.
|
Yes, it's called Employment law, Industrial / Employment tribunals and, ultimately, the courts. None of which are single race focused yet all of which, strangely, seem to be suffering a lack of activity (at any level) proving what you allege to be commonplace.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escapee
I am sure similar to my example happens in all parts of the country by companies run by people from a different race, proving however is near impossible as you say.
|
The statistics and national tribunal / court records would suggest otherwise. Proving it needs a prima facie case to test and as I stated earlier I'm not personally aware of any having been prosecuted in respect of positive discrimination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escapee
Personally I dont see a huge issue with them openly admitting they only employ Pakistani people, as long as I am allowed to openly choose what race I employ.
|
Yes, but they haven't admitted it. Your earlier statement only proved self exclusion / discrimination on the part of third parties so I'm afraid your statement is based on a flawed hypothesis. That aside, your closing statement says a lot in that it suggests that you believe the way to redress discrimination is to discriminate - in effect your argument bolsters the very premise of positive discrimination - you might want to think about that.