Black Lives Matter

Originally Posted by nomadking

So how many schemes and how much money go to things that include them?
Eg
So many other factors involved, and race ISN'T one of them. Eg Better to live in the right area, where there are race tracks, and the engineering companies that go with it. The White people in F1 DIDN'T ONLY get there simply because they are White. They also didn't get there overnight.

So how many black or female F1 drivers are there?

Lewis Hamilton springs to mind.

A six-time Formula One World Champion, he is widely regarded as one of the greatest drivers in the history of the sport

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Indeed but my point was more aimed at those that push for equality of outcome. i.e. a specific quota of whatever minority you might think of.

Meaning you put a less able and qualified person ahead of a more able and qualified person just to fulfil an outcome.

I don't know anyone who pushes for that, but when you have all-male boards and half the population is female you start to wonder what criteria makes someone more able? Is it because they look and sounds like similar people on the board? Is unconscious bias playing a role?

---------- Post added at 14:12 ---------- Previous post was at 14:08 ----------

Originally Posted by Paul

I have seen countless adverts from my local council stating they "particularly welcome" applicants from non white communities, more bias.

You dont fix racism by applying it in the opposite direction.

This instance is not applying it in the opposite direction. If an employer is under-represented in some communities be it race, gender, age etc then it needs to ensure it is welcoming to people from such communities to encourage them to apply.
Having a diverse workforce brings different perspectives and ideas to the table and should ultimately make it more successful.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Maggy

So how many black or female F1 drivers are there?

How many are remotely interested? How many have the dedication required? How many have anything like the required qualifications and more importantly ABILITY?

The main factor helping out Lewis Hamilton was the support from his father. Without it, he wouldn't have got anywhere.

Difficult to be sure from the pictures and/or listed nationality.
F1 Drivers At least 3.
F2 Drivers At least 5.
F3 Drivers At least 3.
Those with surnames such as Scumacher, Piquet, Alesi, Fittipaldi have advantages, but still nothing whatsoever to do with race.

Eg So much racing engine technology takes place within a 20 mile radius of Northampton. We also have Silverstone race track.

---------- Post added at 14:35 ---------- Previous post was at 14:27 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I don't know anyone who pushes for that, but when you have all-male boards and half the population is female you start to wonder what criteria makes someone more able? Is it because they look and sounds like similar people on the board? Is unconscious bias playing a role?

---------- Post added at 14:12 ---------- Previous post was at 14:08 ----------


This instance is not applying it in the opposite direction. If an employer is under-represented in some communities be it race, gender, age etc then it needs to ensure it is welcoming to people from such communities to encourage them to apply.
Having a diverse workforce brings different perspectives and ideas to the table and should ultimately make it more successful.

They tend to get to those positions because of ABILITY. Bet none of the companies that have mainly non-white or females as employees or board members gets any adverse attention.


People are expecting to simply piggy-back on the previous success of White males in building the companies in the first place.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Never seen that happen - just because someone has a "protected characteristic" doesn't mean they'll get a job because of that; they also have to have the competencies, capabilities, and required experience.

(unless you're talking about political Ministerial posts - experience and competency don't seem to be a requisite (for whichever party is in power)).

Last line of the Virgin Media policy. 50/50 gender balance within the company by 2025.

https://www.virginmedia.com/corporat...more-inclusive

Or Vodafone’s policy for women to hold 40% of top positions by 2025

https://www.vodafone.com/our-purpose...ender-equality

Once you set a target, followed by date to reach that target then how can you possibly Be objective when assessing candidates for a position?

https://www.stemwomen.co.uk/blog/201...tem-statistics

If you have only 25% of women, for example, in STEM.and you have a policy to have 50/50 male /female Engineers then that is to the disadvantage of male graduates, plus you are potentially not picking the best graduates based on their grades.

---------- Post added at 14:57 ---------- Previous post was at 14:55 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

So how many schemes and how much money go to things that include them?
Eg
So many other factors involved, and race ISN'T one of them. Eg Better to live in the right area, where there are race tracks, and the engineering companies that go with it. The White people in F1 DIDN'T ONLY get there simply because they are White. They also didn't get there overnight.

F1 is a bad example, you generally get there if you’re rich.

---------- Post added at 14:58 ---------- Previous post was at 14:57 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I don't know anyone who pushes for that, but when you have all-male boards and half the population is female you start to wonder what criteria makes someone more able? Is it because they look and sounds like similar people on the board? Is unconscious bias playing a role?

See reply to Hugh and research any top companies diversity policy.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

. . but when you have all-male boards and half the population is female you start to wonder what criteria makes someone more able? </snip>

Men don't get pregnant
Men can talk about football
Men can take their sexy young secretary to out of town 'business meetings'
Men don't get stressed if other men have the same suit/shoes/tie on

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

The thing is there isn't a law that specifically targets minority groups. It's people, and their interpretation of said laws. White, able bodied, heterosexual men don't experience the downside of such unconscious, or even conscious, bias.

Admirable in it's ignorance of the divisions within society, cross cutting race, class, political standing, gender, age.

I'd say the opposite. While the older, more ignorant, generations are dying out the flag of nationalism is stoking up divisions around the world at the minute. Given the failure of capitalism, and globalisation, to generate wealth that everyone has a stake in such divisions will only continue.

Who can possibly resent someone who simply wants equality? As said white, heterosexual, able-bodied man. It'd be extremely ignorant of me to claim that everyone has exactly the same opportunities as me in education or employment. And the reasons are entirely structural. Who wouldn't be pissed off if the game was fundamentally rigged against them?

There are laws that deal with race discrimination, sex discrimination, disability discrimination, religious discrimination, etc. This creates resentment from a part of the population who do not feel that they have any protection. We need just one law that guarantees fairness for everyone, and that will do wonders for attitudes. Just as we've seen arguments that 'all lives matter' to the current BLM campaign. Exclude a section of society from a perceived benefit and you enhance divisions instead of eliminating them.

You confuse 'nationalism' with 'racism'. There is nothing wrong with being proud of one's country, which does not mean that those with such beliefs are racists. You are dragging capitalism and globalism into this argument - are you attempting to dilute the message? Of course you are. I agree that capitalism and globalism could be better managed, but that has nothing to do with racism, which is what this is all about.

As for saying 'who can possibly resent someone who simply wants equality?, now that is a pretty naive thing to say. Whether or not you think that is perverse, nevertheless many people do hold that view, and I have seen it first hand. Clearly, minority groups are at a disadvantage, but creating laws just for them is the wrong way to go about it.

Notice I didn't call you 'ignorant' for disagreeing with a perfectly sensible post.

[nomadking]

Basically, perceived(ie imagined) Racism and Sexism aren't really factors in "equality of opportunity". So many other factors in play.


There were so many factors holding me back in the past, but if it was the same situation today, the thing that would be holding me back, by not having people falling over themselves to get around those things, is the fact that I'm a White male.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Paul

I dont know how you managed to say that with a straight face.

Did you miss the post about the Football League 'rule'.

Is there a rule that says they must interview a none BAME candidate ?
(Answer: No, there isnt).

I have seen countless adverts from my local council stating they "particularly welcome" applicants from non white communities, more bias.

You dont fix racism by applying it in the opposite direction.

I can see that they are trying to ensure their processes are inclusive. However when I look around workplaces I've been in I see predominantly white people. Understandably, as that's the biggest proportion of the wider population. I haven't seen any evidence of the best candidate being overlooked if white.

[downquark1]

If you have only 25% of women, for example, in STEM.and you have a policy to have 50/50 male /female Engineers then that is to the disadvantage of male graduates, plus you are potentially not picking the best graduates based on their grades.

OK so this is a true story. A few years ago Theresa May ordered companies to publish their wages gaps. So the HR departments in universities went to work to calculate their wage gaps. To their horror they found a large wage gap.
So it seems that the highest paid positions (Professors) skew male and the lowest paid positions (cleaners) skew female. How could this be? Could they be relentless bigots? Could the labour markets be skewed, it matters not, the wage gap does not care when the results are published. How to fix this? You can't sack the professors, that would be illegal and leave you with no university. You can't pull a load of female professors from no where. So what to do?

Well what some Universities did was remove the cleaners from the payroll and hire an external company to do the cleaning.

So by one form of analysis they shrank the wage gap which they can now brag about at cocktail parties and feminist award ceremonies.

By another form of analysis all they did was sack some working class women and call it a victory for equality.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by downquark1

OK so this is a true story. A few years ago Theresa May ordered companies to public their wages gaps. So the HR departments in universities went to work to calculate their wage gaps. To their horror they found a large wage gap.
So it seems that the highest paid positions (Professors) skew male and the lowest paid positions (cleaners) skew female. How could this be? Could they be relentless bigots? Could the labour markets be skewed, it matters not, the wage gap does not care when the results are published. How to fix this? You can't sack the professors, that would be illegal and leave you with no university. You can't pull a load of female professors from no where. So what to do?

Well what some Universities did was remove the cleaners from the payroll and hire an external company to do the cleaning.

So by one form of analysis they shrank the wage gap which they can now brag about at cocktail parties and feminist award ceremonies.

By another form of analysis all they did was sack some working class women and call it a victory for equality.

Clearly demonstrating how ill-judged our current equality laws are.

Originally Posted by downquark1

OK so this is a true story. A few years ago Theresa May ordered companies to publish their wages gaps. So the HR departments in universities went to work to calculate their wage gaps. To their horror they found a large wage gap.
So it seems that the highest paid positions (Professors) skew male and the lowest paid positions (cleaners) skew female. How could this be? Could they be relentless bigots? Could the labour markets be skewed, it matters not, the wage gap does not care when the results are published. How to fix this? You can't sack the professors, that would be illegal and leave you with no university. You can't pull a load of female professors from no where. So what to do?

Well what some Universities did was remove the cleaners from the payroll and hire an external company to do the cleaning.

So by one form of analysis they shrank the wage gap which they can now brag about at cocktail parties and feminist award ceremonies.

By another form of analysis all they did was sack some working class women and call it a victory for equality.

I call "shenanigans"...

The Universities that have outsourced cleaning also usually outsource the maintenance, porters, and security work (all low paid, but most maintenance, porters, and security staff are mostly male, so balances out the cleaning staff) - also, most Universities' Gender Pay Gap & Equal Pay Report is also by pay grade and staff category, not just the overall gap; for instance, see Strathclyde's report

Our overall pay analysis by gender indicates that the University has a marginal gender pay gap within grades. Only Grades 4 and 5 have a difference in pay between the average male salary and the average female salary which is above 1% (in these cases, the pay gap is 1.5% and 2.3% in favour of females). Since our last Equal Pay Audit, the equal pay gap at Professor/Director level has reduced from 4.8% in favour of males to 0.5% in favour of males. This reduction is primarily a consequence of the introduction of a zoning system for our professorial staff during 2016/17.

Despite there being equal pay within grades, there is still an overall gender pay gap as a result of occupational segregation; within the University there are significantly higher proportions of females than males at junior levels, in particular in Grades 1, 4 and 5, and, conversely, higher proportions of males than females at the more senior Grades 9, 10 and at Professor and Director level. Between 2017 and 2019 there has been a reduction of more than three percentage points in the overall gender pay gap (the percentage difference between men’s average hourly pay (excluding overtime) and women’s average hourly pay (excluding overtime), irrespective of Grade) and the University remains commited to taking appropriate action to further reduce this gap.

btw, I worked at 3 different Universities over a 10 year period (at a senior level) and never saw, or attended, a cocktail party - bit of inverse grading snobbery occurring in that jibe, methinks...

[nomadking]

There was a University that in the name of equality, paid men a LOWER hourly rate than the women. The men were expected to work for more hours and more days for the same annual salary as the women. The jobs the men were doing were ones that the women couldn't and wouldn't do.


How many women are clearing out fat bergs in the sewer system? How many women on the refuse collection rounds? The list goes on and on.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I call "shenanigans"...

The Universities that have outsourced cleaning also usually outsource the maintenance, porters, and security work (all low paid, but most maintenance, porters, and security staff are mostly male, so balances out the cleaning staff) - also, most Universities' Gender Pay Gap & Equal Pay Report is also by pay grade and staff category, not just the overall gap; for instance, see Strathclyde's report

btw, I worked at 3 different Universities over a 10 year period (at a senior level) and never saw, or attended, a cocktail party - bit of inverse grading snobbery occurring in that jibe, methinks...

Head porter? or security guard.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Head porter? or security guard.

That's about senior as White men are going to be allowed to get.