And Back to Racial Discrimination

[rambot]

Seems reasonable to me. Especially in a white dominated business environment where many people get job interviews due to their connections. Hence white has and retains over the years, the upper hand. Therefore needs some redress. No harm in interviewing people.

But yet another, Oh us poor repressed whiteys thread.
Really feel for the horrible plight of whites in USA.

NOBODY suffers the way white folks in the USA suffer now it seems.

 

[stevil]

That can be a problem when prior discriminatory hiring practices have created the situation that the internal pool does not present the desired diversity.

It's what is classified as systemic racism rather than blatant racism, the person doing it isn't necessarily racist, and they aren't doing it in order to benefit or repress a certain race. But the end result is that the white male demographic ultimately benefits and the non white male demographics are ultimately left out in the cold.

People don't consider, is what I am doing fair based on demographics or is it disadvantaging some?
Instead they innocently conclude, well this person came highly recommended, they have the necessary skills, the person that referred them said they are honest and great to work with, so I'd be a fool not to hire them and so yet another white gets a job where other people from other demographics weren't even considered.

 

[bekkilyn]

The referral system is pretty interesting. I was hired for one position by a gay manager, and a couple of people already working under him were also gay because I think they were all already working on that team before he became manager. Over the course of time, our part of the department (which was a fairly large team) ended up being me and two other women and everyone one else for a while was a gay male. It wasn't because the manager was specifically seeking to hire gay males, but that when something came open, someone on the team would refer one or more of their friends, who would typically also be gay, and then when another opening happened, there would be more referrals and so on.

Eventually there was more diversity over time because people would either quit or be transferred or in some cases fired and I think at one point he wasn't giving any of the referrals any attention because he didn't like the people who were making the referrals and so he would end up hiring outside of the company.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

The referral system is pretty interesting. I was hired for one position by a gay manager, and a couple of people already working under him were also gay because I think they were all already working on that team before he became manager. Over the course of time, our part of the department (which was a fairly large team) ended up being me and two other women and everyone one else for a while was a gay male.

I saw a similar phenomenon with an IT support department that had an Indian manager - 80% of staff were from India and over time every new hire I saw go in there over the course of 18 months or so was Indian.

 

[stevil]

The referral system is pretty interesting. I was hired for one position by a gay manager, and a couple of people already working under him were also gay because I think they were all already working on that team before he became manager. Over the course of time, our part of the department (which was a fairly large team) ended up being me and two other women and everyone one else for a while was a gay male. It wasn't because the manager was specifically seeking to hire gay males, but that when something came open, someone on the team would refer one or more of their friends, who would typically also be gay, and then when another opening happened, there would be more referrals and so on.

My first job post university was working at KFC and most of the employees were Indians.
It wasn't an Indian part of town, so I assume it was just a result of the referral system.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

People don't consider, is what I am doing fair based on demographics or is it disadvantaging some?
Instead they innocently conclude, well this person came highly recommended, they have the necessary skills, the person that referred them said they are honest and great to work with, so I'd be a fool not to hire them and so yet another white gets a job where other people from other demographics weren't even considered.

It's a hard decision - there are a lot of advantages to using referrals. Recruiting costs for senior positions are high, and various studies show that referrals have higher retention rates than external hires. There's also the "team player" dynamic - people refer those they want to work with, thus they tend to fit into the team better.

The downside is that you can get a very dull groupthink team if you're not careful and Trenton Smithe the 3rd from St-Poshbury Rich Kid High bring in all his mates who crewed the 8-man sculls in year 12 or played rugby together.

 

[Bradskii]

My first job post university was working at KFC and most of the employees were Indians.
It wasn't an Indian part of town, so I assume it was just a result of the referral system.

Whenever I was in a position to hire I have invariably gone with referrals. But...those referrals were from a disparate group of people that I knew in the business. So the people we hired were also a pretty mixed bunch. The only person we hired following the job being advertised interviewed really well, was well qualified, was really keen and so I took him on - and I had to show him the door three weeks after he started. Not my finest moment...

That particular company had just over fifty people in the Sydney office. And there were thirty nationalities represented.

 

[stevil]

Whenever I was in a position to hire I have invariably gone with referrals. But...those referrals were from a disparate group of people that I knew in the business. So the people we hired were also a pretty mixed bunch.

I think we can all see the allure of referrals, but hopefully some people can also see the dangers from a
social demographic perspective too.
But of course not all hiring managers are aware, enlightened or socially responsible enough to act responsibly.
Ways to mitigate rather than to simply throw out the referral system:
1. Educate hiring managers as to the issues
2. A company wanting to be socially responsible and seen as an equal opportunity employer may choose to enforce policies such that advertisements for positions must go to market, or efforts to create opportunities for diversification must at least carry through to the interview stage.
3. Companies should also review salaries and remuneration packages to ensure they are fair across demographics (race and gender)
I don't think there is anything insidious about such policies, as this OP is trying to make out.

 

[RDKirk]

I think we can all see the allure of referrals, but hopefully some people can also see the dangers from a
social demographic perspective too.
But of course not all hiring managers are aware, enlightened or socially responsible enough to act responsibly.
Ways to mitigate rather than to simply throw out the referral system:
1. Educate hiring managers as to the issues
2. A company wanting to be socially responsible and seen as an equal opportunity employer may choose to enforce policies such that advertisements for positions must go to market, or efforts to create opportunities for diversification must at least carry through to the interview stage.
3. Companies should also review salaries and remuneration packages to ensure they are fair across demographics (race and gender)
I don't think there is anything insidious about such policies, as this OP is trying to make out.

Or they could do as companies generally do: State corporate objectives and reward those managers who meet them.

 

[Bradskii]

I think we can all see the allure of referrals, but hopefully some people can also see the dangers from a
social demographic perspective too.
But of course not all hiring managers are aware, enlightened or socially responsible enough to act responsibly.
Ways to mitigate rather than to simply throw out the referral system:
1. Educate hiring managers as to the issues
2. A company wanting to be socially responsible and seen as an equal opportunity employer may choose to enforce policies such that advertisements for positions must go to market, or efforts to create opportunities for diversification must at least carry through to the interview stage.
3. Companies should also review salaries and remuneration packages to ensure they are fair across demographics (race and gender)
I don't think there is anything insidious about such policies, as this OP is trying to make out.

'After the Race Relations act of 1965, sociologists decided to investigate how common racial discrimination in hiring was. They sent pairs of identical CVs to prospective employers. The only difference was that one used a traditional English name and one used an “ethnic” name. The “white-sounding” names received far more favourable responses, despite the fact that they had exactly the same qualifications and experience.' Four ways your name can affect your job prospects

 

[stevil]

'After the Race Relations act of 1965, sociologists decided to investigate how common racial discrimination in hiring was. They sent pairs of identical CVs to prospective employers. The only difference was that one used a traditional English name and one used an “ethnic” name. The “white-sounding” names received far more favourable responses, despite the fact that they had exactly the same qualifications and experience.' Four ways your name can affect your job prospects

In my first IT job, I applied for it, and an Indian friend (with an Indian name) of mine also applied for it.
His qualifications were more suited to Software development than mine. The job was a software development job.
I got an interview and he didn't

In NZ, especially in IT there are typically a lot of Chinese and Indians qualified for IT jobs. In the two years I was at that job, they never had any Indians or Chinese, I never saw any come in for interviews.
I'm pretty sure my boss was filtering out Chinese and Indian names.

 

[stevil]

Or they could do as companies generally do: State corporate objectives and reward those managers who meet them.

Which means, just ignore the issue.

 

[RDKirk]

Which means, just ignore the issue.

Are you in the same thread? Did you read the article in the OP?

The company stated diversity as a corporate goal and is rewarding managers who meet it, which is how companies generally get goals met. They aren't ignoring the issue. That's why this thread exists.

 

[stevil]

Are you in the same thread? Did you read the article in the OP?

The company stated diversity as a corporate goal and is rewarding managers who meet it, which is how companies generally get goals met. They aren't ignoring the issue. That's why this thread exists.

This is very different from what you said in the post that I was responding to.

 

[Larniavc]

If you are selecting people based on race for the interview you are also selecting for the job based on race.

Simply untrue. There is no obligation to appoint a candidate if they did not perform well at interview.

Exactly how many times have you recruited in an organisation? I have; many times. When I recruit people for the nhs I’m obligated to offer an interview to anyone disable. But I’m NOT obligated to appoint. That is what you don’t seem to accept.

 

[Goonie]

Simply untrue. There is no obligation to appoint a candidate if they did not perform well at interview.

Exactly how many times have you recruited in an organisation? I have; many times. When I recruit people for the nhs I’m obligated to offer an interview to anyone disable. But I’m NOT obligated to appoint. That is what you don’t seem to accept.

And even if disabled they also have to be qualified for the role.

 

[RDKirk]

This is very different from what you said in the post that I was responding to.

Nope. Did you not read the original post article?

 

[grasping the after wind]

Now that I've been doing interviews for hiring, that's honestly a very difficult question depending on the position. We've made a few hires for positions for hospital clinical technical positions and honestly, the most technically qualified people have failed miserably in these roles. On paper they look fantastic. However, they often don't have the people skills that are required for what appears to be a purely technical role.

Your idea of what criterion made one the most qualified might have be faulty then. If people skills are important to a position, then a candidate that lacks in that area is not the most qualified no matter what technical expertise that candidate might possess.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

Your idea of what criterion made one the most qualified might have be faulty then. If people skills are important to a position, then a candidate that lacks in that area is not the most qualified no matter what technical expertise that candidate might possess.

It's a challenging position. You have to know IT servers and wireless networking, and hospital clinical communications and workflows. Those two areas have no overlap, so generally our applicants are IT folks who don't have the greatest people skills let alone know how hospital clinicians, especially nursing, work.

 

[RDKirk]

It's a challenging position. You have to know IT servers and wireless networking, and hospital clinical communications and workflows. Those two areas have no overlap, so generally our applicants are IT folks who don't have the greatest people skills let alone know how hospital clinicians, especially nursing, work.

Sounds like what you actually need is what my company called a "business analyst"--the tech-savvy, non-developer bridge between the two.