|
Affirmative action-- first steps to get rid of it |
Post Reply 
|
Page 123 4> |
| Author | ||
Linus 
Platinum Member 
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10 Joined: 10 November 2002 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7908 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Affirmative action-- first steps to get rid of itPosted: 30 June 2009 at 12:19pm |
|
|
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-firefighters-court30-2009jun30,0,796881.story
|
||
|
||
 |
||
|
Benjichang
Moderator Group 
I pwned Leroy Jenkins! Joined: 03 January 2004 Location: Ohiya Status: Offline Points: 12618 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 12:23pm |
|
|
I highly doubt affirmative action is going anywhere, especially by this ruling.
FTA: "The ruling is a clear win for the white firefighters, but it does not appear to make a sweeping change in the law. The justices did not say, for example, that it is unconstitutional for public employers ever to consider the racial makeup of their workforce. And it does not strike down the part of the Civil Rights Act that says employers should avoid job standards and tests that have a "disparate impact" on minorities." |
||
 irc.esper.net #paintball |
||
|
||
|
Linus
Platinum Member
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10 Joined: 10 November 2002 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7908 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 12:25pm |
|
|
Hence why I put "first steps".
It's a stupid policy, and has no place in the workforce, or anywhere for that matter. |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Benjichang
Moderator Group
I pwned Leroy Jenkins! Joined: 03 January 2004 Location: Ohiya Status: Offline Points: 12618 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 12:30pm |
|
I really don't know how I feel about affirmative action. While minorities do need to be protected from unfair and racist hiring practices, I still think that the best qualified people should get the top positions. It's an extremely tricky subject that many people oversimplify. Affirmative action by itself isn't a bad thing. It's all about how it is implemented. Also, I think this comic is worth a repost:  |
||
|
irc.esper.net #paintball |
||
|
||
|
Linus
Platinum Member
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10 Joined: 10 November 2002 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7908 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 12:37pm |
|
If you have 2 people, and one is more qualified then the other, it should be a no brainer, no matter the color of their skin. Any other such thinking is stupid. Equality is for everyone, not just minorities. |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Benjichang
Moderator Group
I pwned Leroy Jenkins! Joined: 03 January 2004 Location: Ohiya Status: Offline Points: 12618 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 12:48pm |
|
|
||
|
irc.esper.net #paintball |
||
|
||
|
Linus
Platinum Member
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10 Joined: 10 November 2002 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7908 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 12:52pm |
|
|
If they are similarly qualified, race still should never be a factor.
Previous jobs. Past schooling. Extracurricular activities. Heck, even salary requested and just how they kick it off when you first meet them. |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Enmity
Member 
Strike 2 - Image Joined: 25 August 2007 Status: Offline Points: 735 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 12:55pm |
|
|
I'm going to have to go with linus on this one, race should NEVER be a determining factor.
|
||
|
||
|
Benjichang
Moderator Group
I pwned Leroy Jenkins! Joined: 03 January 2004 Location: Ohiya Status: Offline Points: 12618 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 1:06pm |
|
|
Making race a determining factor is a two-way street. On one hand you can have employers hiring people because their race. (which is bad) On the other you can have employers not hiring people because of their race. (which is bad) Affirmative action exists to prevent the latter.
And this is the real problem with affirmative action. It's kind of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" type thing. |
||
|
irc.esper.net #paintball |
||
|
||
|
Linus
Platinum Member
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10 Joined: 10 November 2002 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7908 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 1:17pm |
|
Either way, one person is getting hired because of their race, while another is not getting hired because of their race. As such, not equal in any definition of the word. How is racism ok when it's for minorities, but not ok when it's for white people? Edited by Linus - 30 June 2009 at 1:18pm |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Peter Parker
Member
Joined: 02 March 2003 Location: New York Status: Offline Points: 996 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 2:02pm |
|
See, this type of canard is why people are getting hung up on affirmative action, along with your earlier hypothetical about "two equally qualified candidates."
Both of those are complete BS.
Here is reality: NO TWO CANDIDATES ARE EVER EQUALLY QUALIFIED. Moreover, you proceed to define "qualified" in a very narrow, self-serving way - education, job experience, etc. That's not how people get hired either, nor is it how people are selected for admission to schools.
Reality is a lot more complex than that, as is affirmative action.
Strawman. Big, giant, strawman.
|
||
|
"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
||
|
||
|
Linus
Platinum Member
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10 Joined: 10 November 2002 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7908 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 2:22pm |
|
|
We'll go ahead and take your argument that "No two people are ever equally qualified" (which is correct)
Since this statement is true, why is affirmative action even in existence? Common sense dictates, and anyone with an IQ over 100, should know you hire the better qualified person, race be damned. Again, arguing otherwise is stupid. Hiring a black person to a COO will not make up for the "hundreds of years of repression". |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
tallen702
Moderator Group
Hipster before Hipster was cool... Joined: 10 June 2002 Location: Under Your Bed Status: Offline Points: 11857 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 2:29pm |
|
|
So, here's my question, at what point do we say, "Okay, the playing field is level as is, time to do away with affirmative action"?
Is it when the socio-economic factors such as median income, education level and others are equal? Or is it when the population is a 50/50 split between "whites" and the current "minorities"? Or is it some other arbitrary factor that makes just as little sense? You're absolutely right Parker, AA is a complex issue and a complex system, but much like the tax code, it's full of loop holes, imbalances, and shoddy work. If affirmative action is necessary, why not scrap the current system and come up with a better and much more straight-forward one? |
||
|
<Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.>
|
||
|
||
|
Rofl_Mao
Platinum Member
request denied Joined: 27 October 2008 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 3210 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 2:35pm |
|
This. |
||
|
||
|
Frozen Balls
Platinum Member
Strike 1, filter dodge, 1.28.10 Joined: 14 June 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5865 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 3:21pm |
|
|
I think affirmative action is acceptable IF a candidate can actually prove they have struggled mightily in their life and have overcome major obstacles.
Note I did not mention race. I mean any major factors...parents dying, being poor, etc. Being black isn't an excuse. Being black (or white) from a poor neighborhood in the inner-city, surviving gang warfare, getting your HS diploma, and trying to get into a college...now that is worth something. I'm sick of these little check boxes asking, "would you identify yourself with a minority group?" |
||
|
||
|
||
|
Peter Parker
Member
Joined: 02 March 2003 Location: New York Status: Offline Points: 996 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 3:57pm |
|
And those things are obnoxious and offensive. No doubt.
But let's look at a more up-close hypothetical: I am interviewing two people for a job. They both meet my basic criteria, in terms of education and experience. Neither one is a jerk. I wouldn't mind hiring either one, but I can only hire one.
So, I dig deeper. One candidate did peace corps. Cool. The other was a high-level athlete. Cool. One candidate has language skills, the other has a deeper science background. One person grew up in the city, the other in the country. One is obviously left-leaning polically, the other is more moderate. One candidate belongs to an ethnic minority, the other does not. One appears to be fairly religious, the other not so much. One is a woman, the other is a man. One has long family roots locally, the other is from out of state. One is gay, one is straight. One has military experience, the other does not. One is tall, one is fat. One belongs to my racquet club, the other does not. One is a Packers fan, the other is a Vikings fan.
Might some of these factors influence my decision, whether intentionally or unintentionally? Should they? Should I be allowed to use some of these factors to influence my decision? Which ones, and why/why not?
|
||
|
"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
||
|
||
|
Linus
Platinum Member
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10 Joined: 10 November 2002 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7908 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 4:06pm |
|
|
No one is debating choosing someone the would meld better with the workplace.
The difference is choosing someone, for ANY part, because of race. |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Peter Parker
Member
Joined: 02 March 2003 Location: New York Status: Offline Points: 996 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 4:14pm |
|
I actually wasn't talking about melding. I was targeting something else entirely.
But since you brought it up... you say "meld better" and "race" as if those two are always independent. Yet that is obviously not always the case - arguably hardly ever the case.
|
||
|
"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
||
|
||
|
Frozen Balls
Platinum Member
Strike 1, filter dodge, 1.28.10 Joined: 14 June 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5865 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 4:22pm |
|
They will influence you. They should influence you. Hire whomever you are most comfortable with. Unless, of course, you are a publicly traded company. Then go for the most ridiculously diverse people you can find. Also, this sounds very much like a high school Sociology class essay question. You have presented the two most perfectly diverse candidates alive. I dislike you. |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Mack
Moderator Group
Has no impulse! control Joined: 13 January 2004 Location: 2nd Circle Status: Offline Points: 9906 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 June 2009 at 5:28pm |
|
Easy decision; don't hire the liberal. Political leaning does not fall under protected classes so you can hire the moderate and have the added benefit of not having continuous whining about politics in the workplace. (If the example had been a liberal and a conservative the decision would have been more difficult. I probably would have to base the choice on which one had the less shrill voice so as to minimize the annoyance from the political whining/conspiracy theories. Or . . . I could hire both and tell them they are both only provisional employees and they are competing for the same permanent spot; then set back and watch the fun while stirring the pot occasionally as needed.) |
||
|
||
|
||
|
Post Reply
|
Page 123 4> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
Justices rule, 5-4, that New Haven, Conn., was wrong to deny promotions to the firefighters, who outscored black colleagues on a test. The decision overturns a ruling supported by Sonia Sotomayor.