Black Lives Matter

Originally Posted by Hugh

Unfortunately, putting it on a poster doesn't make it true.

You know as well as everyone else that companies are setting such targets, I believe the BBC's are mentioned earlier in this very topic.

The majority of Black people are indeed reasonable, they dont take offence at everything with the word black in it, they dont want special treatment, they dont feel the need to pull down statues. Unfortunately, the minority do, and they are the ones shouting loudest atm, if it continues I dont think it will end well.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Maggy

Think of the word queer.The word that the gay fraternity took for their own and used..How is it different for black youths to use the N word in the same way?

I don't think that it is any different, I think it's exactly the same scenario.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Paul

Ah, your standard answer to anything it seems.

Doesn't make him wrong though.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Doesn't make him wrong though.

Doesnt make him right either.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Paul

Unfortunately, putting it on a poster doesn't make it true.

You know as well as everyone else that companies are setting such targets, I believe the BBC's are mentioned earlier in this very topic.

The majority of Black people are indeed reasonable, they dont take offence at everything with the word black in it, they dont want special treatment, they dont feel the need to pull down statues. Unfortunately, the minority do, and they are the ones shouting loudest atm, if it continues I dont think it will end well.

I think you're right - in the UK the conversation is less extreme. People aren't taking offence at words with black in, etc. There isn't widespread removal of statues.
In terms of targets I do see monitoring as useful. If 15% of the working population in an organisation's area is BAME and it only employs 5% BAME there is a potential issue, surely?
It's not about special treatment but it could be about having apprenticeships for entry as oppose to 100% graduates. It could be about advertising in places that everyone will see and not relying on the existing employees to recommend a friend.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I think you're right - in the UK the conversation is less extreme. People aren't taking offence at words with black in, etc. There isn't widespread removal of statues.
In terms of targets I do see monitoring as useful. If 15% of the working population in an organisation's area is BAME and it only employs 5% BAME there is a potential issue, surely?
It's not about special treatment but it could be about having apprenticeships for entry as oppose to 100% graduates. It could be about advertising in places that everyone will see and not relying on the existing employees to recommend a friend.

Statues are being removed or are under attack, Names are being erased from history.

Doesn't mean all of that 15% is available, qualified, or even suitable. Eg sections where women don't go to work, or they don't speak English will straight away reduce that 15%. Should any business/organisation that employs more BAME than in the area be forced to reduce that number? If not, you end up with a situation where they over-represented overall. Same argument goes for women. I should imagine if you looked at small non-white owned businesses, the diversity wouldn't be that great.

There is a huge gulf between entry-level apprenticeship and post-graduate. How is that not asking for special treatment? How many firms never advertise in any form? Fictitious argument, as usual.

---------- Post added at 18:53 ---------- Previous post was at 18:41 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

You're going off-piste into the world of strawmen. I've not said this. I've given you the basic principles to apply as has Hugh.

How is it "strawmen".
Link

Countryfile has sparked a debate on racism with a story suggesting people from the BAME community feel unwelcome in the countryside.
Last night, the BBC show aired a piece fronted by Dwayne Fields in which he investigated a report by Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).
The report, published last year, focused on how people from black, Asian or minority ethnic communities as well as white people felt the UK's national parks are very much a "white environment".
During the segment, Dwayne explained: "When I talk to people from the BAME community, it's clear that they don't view the UK countryside as somewhere that's for them.

No FACTUAL basis for feeling anything like that. They just have to claim it is, and it magically that is proof. In non-white countries, how many people go rambling, camping etc, just for the enjoyment of it? The culture of doing those things, just isn't there in the first place. THEIR problem, not ours.

[Carth]

I think many who have a nice safe & clean job in an office environment (no offence intended to those who do) have a slightly skewed view of some things.

The majority of BAME people looking for work will be nothing like the 'graduates' you're probably used to seeing in and around that sector.

Many probably come from the 'poorer' sectors and, like anyone from a 'working class' background, will be struggling to find anything above minimum wage employment in areas such as factories, hotel work, shops, etc . . in which they, and eastern Europeans, are usually well represented.

If the Gov't and other parties want a higher representation of BAME in roles requiring higher education, they need to make that education available at no cost to the families who can barely afford to live . . . but that then introduces a surge of non BAME into the system too - catch 22 yet again

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Carth

I think many who have a nice safe & clean job in an office environment (no offence intended to those who do) have a slightly skewed view of some things.

The majority of BAME people looking for work will be nothing like the 'graduates' you're probably used to seeing in and around that sector.

Many probably come from the 'poorer' sectors and, like anyone from a 'working class' background, will be struggling to find anything above minimum wage employment in areas such as factories, hotel work, shops, etc . . in which they, and eastern Europeans, are usually well represented.

If the Gov't and other parties want a higher representation of BAME in roles requiring higher education, they need to make that education available at no cost to the families who can barely afford to live . . . but that then introduces a surge of non BAME into the system too - catch 22 yet again

Carth,

I think you're falling for it by discussing the lot or otherwise befalling the "BAME" category. I rather tend to use the word BAME in this thread to attack it and the concept behind it.

For example, Asians are split into different ethnicity as defined by HMG in https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures....loyment/latest

The "A" in BAME covers the following ethnicity definitions as regards % of economically active population who are unemployed:

ASIAN 6%
INDIAN 4%
Pakistani/Bangladeshi 8%
Asian other 6%

(Black 9%)

This distribution makes nonsense of pat arguments about 15% BAME population in an area but only 5% employed. Who are the particular "BAME". It's a very bad collective (contrived) noun.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Carth

I think many who have a nice safe & clean job in an office environment (no offence intended to those who do) have a slightly skewed view of some things.

The majority of BAME people looking for work will be nothing like the 'graduates' you're probably used to seeing in and around that sector.

Many probably come from the 'poorer' sectors and, like anyone from a 'working class' background, will be struggling to find anything above minimum wage employment in areas such as factories, hotel work, shops, etc . . in which they, and eastern Europeans, are usually well represented.

If the Gov't and other parties want a higher representation of BAME in roles requiring higher education, they need to make that education available at no cost to the families who can barely afford to live . . . but that then introduces a surge of non BAME into the system too - catch 22 yet again

How many are achieving A level standard? Student loans cover the further education costs for them, and everybody else.
Link

• 13.0% of students got 3 A grades or better (including students whose ethnicity wasn’t known)
• 25.7% of students from the Chinese ethnic group got 3 A grades or better – the highest percentage out of all ethnic groups
• 5.5% of Black students got 3 A grades or better – the lowest percentage out of the 6 aggregated ethnic groups
• 11.2% of students with Mixed ethnicity got 3 A grades or better – this was followed by White students (11.0%), students from the Asian ethnic group (11.0%), students from the Other ethnic group (10.2%)

Education to A level is free. Afro-Caribbean is even lower at 3.4%(only Roma/Traveller is lower). So Chinese have a 7.5 to 1 advantage, and White kids have a 3.2 to 1 advantage. Black Africans can manage 6.1%, so it can't be racism in any way.
That's before you get into numbers. 131,947 White is always going to outnumber 10,475 Black.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

There is a huge gulf between entry-level apprenticeship and post-graduate. How is that not asking for special treatment? How many firms never advertise in any form? Fictitious argument, as usual.

---------- Post added at 18:53 ---------- Previous post was at 18:41 ----------


How is it "strawmen".
Link

No FACTUAL basis for feeling anything like that. They just have to claim it is, and it magically that is proof. In non-white countries, how many people go rambling, camping etc, just for the enjoyment of it? The culture of doing those things, just isn't there in the first place. THEIR problem, not ours.

1. A Level 7 apprenticeship is equivalent to a Masters. You can get great qualifications on the job that don't cripple you financially but may reduce your ability to go out on mid-week pub crawls!
2. "Do White people have to stop walking etc in the countryside, because BAME bullies claim they are somehow excluded?"
- Why is someone a bully just because they say they feel uncomfortable in the countryside? Am I missing something? And the report doesn't say that anyone shouldn't go into the countryside.

[Carth]

Level 7 apprenticeship

Entry requirements can include at least five GCSEs grades A* – C (9 – 4 on the new grading system), including English and maths subjects, and Level 3 qualifications, including A levels, NVQs, or a BTEC. Some employers will expect or require applicants to have studied subjects relevant to the apprenticeship.


I refer you to this snippet

5.5% of Black students got 3 A grades or better

and then, of course, you have to get the job (apprenticeship) to start with

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

1. A Level 7 apprenticeship is equivalent to a Masters. You can get great qualifications on the job that don't cripple you financially but may reduce your ability to go out on mid-week pub crawls!
2. "Do White people have to stop walking etc in the countryside, because BAME bullies claim they are somehow excluded?"
- Why is someone a bully just because they say they feel uncomfortable in the countryside? Am I missing something? And the report doesn't say that anyone shouldn't go into the countryside.

Link

Higher Level 7 Apprenticeships are the equivalent to a Masters level qualification. They’re very competitive and to be considered for one of these Apprenticeships, you should currently hold a degree, have completed a degree level Apprenticeship or have enough relevant experience in the industry the Level 7 Apprenticeship is in.

So where are level 7s excluded? Meaningless example. They are not the typical Apprenticeship level.

If you choose to do an intermediate (level 2) Apprenticeship, you’ll get qualifications the equivalent of 5 GCSES. An advanced (level 3) Apprenticeship is the same as doing 2 A-Levels! There are longer programmes such as the higher Apprenticeships and degree Apprenticeships. Higher (Level 4) Apprenticeships would mean you get qualifications the equivalent to a foundation year of a degree but higher Apprenticeships are also at level 5 and level 6. A degree (level 6) Apprenticeship will give you a Bachelor’s Degree qualification and a Masters (level 7) Apprenticeship would be the equivalent of your getting a master’s degree! What’s not to love about gaining those qualifications, all without the debt?!

Only levels 6 and 7 are degree level and they've only been around 5 years. Not enough time to make that much of an impact.

However, the real enhancement of the pathway came in 2015, when degree apprenticeships were launched. Through degree apprenticeship programmes, learners can now achieve a Level 6 or 7 qualification (gaining a full bachelor’s or master’s degree), while working and earning money at the same time.

If you can't (or can't be bothered to) reach A level standard, how likely are you to reach degree level?


So what else is meant to make BAME feel more comfortable, other than ethnic cleansing of the countryside? If the problem is meant to be the presence of White people, then the implied solution is removal of that presence. What else could it imply? It's actually just an excuse to make yet more BOGUS claims of racism.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Link
So where are level 7s excluded? Meaningless example. They are not the typical Apprenticeship level.
Only levels 6 and 7 are degree level and they've only been around 5 years. Not enough time to make that much of an impact.
If you can't (or can't be bothered to) reach A level standard, how likely are you to reach degree level?

Apprenticeships are an example of one of the ways I explained that entry to organisations could be made fairer as oppose to your perception of special treatment. If a large organisation has the disparity I mentioned, it's likely due to far lower levels than Masters. I'm sure you can think of many other ways in which recruitment can be made fairer without giving special treatment to any particular groups.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Apprenticeships are an example of one of the ways I explained that entry to organisations could be made fairer as oppose to your perception of special treatment. I'm sure you can think of many other ways in which recruitment can be made fairer without giving special treatment to any particular groups.

But there hasn't been enough time to judge anything(it will take 2 or 3 extra years to reach that level), they're not achieving A level standard in the first place, and where is the evidence that employers are treating level 6 and 7 apprenticeships, adversely? If anything the complaint from employers is that graduates don't have much actual real world, hands-on experience. In that sense Apprenticeships are superior in value, but there will currently only be a couple of years worth of degree level Apprentices.
Link

Did you know that 3 in 4 apprentices are kept on by their employer upon completing their apprenticeship?

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

If 15% of the working population in an organisation's area is BAME and it only employs 5% BAME there is a potential issue, surely?

Not really, numbers (as usual) mean nothing on their own.

If 1% of of the working population in an area is blind, does that mean there is a potential issue because no blind people are employed as drivers ?