[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Choro&Swing

You are right, or close to it. At the university where I taught for decades, applicants for teaching positions were all sent a card on which they could if they wished check their “race”. It wasn’t required. This was mailed to the Diversity Office, where it would be registered. If there were any applicants who met diversity requirements, this was communicated to the chair of the department search committee. In my department, any “diverse” applicants were interviewed as a matter of course unless they were clearly unsuitable for the job because of education or work history or publication history. We weren’t forced to hire a “diverse” candidate, but sometimes we were told that if we did, we would also get to hire someone else: two hires for the price of one.

Before we could post an advertisement for a job opening anywhere, we had to submit the ad to the Diversity Office, where it would be examined. It had to meet diversity requirements before it would be approved. It had to deliberately state that we really wanted to hire a “diverse” person of some sort. (This did not include people of Asian background, as we already have a lot of them teaching on campus.) Ideally, the teaching duties would be listed in such a way that the “diverse” applicant would be the best suited, or at least would fit one of the POSSIBLE needs.

HOWEVER, I should also note that any self-identified MILITARY VETERANS automatically went to the head of the line for any job search. They were ALWAYS interviewed if they were somewhat qualified. We were never forced to hire them, but if we didn’t, we had to provide a written explanation of why they weren’t the best candidate. (Consider that there might be a hundred applicants for one position, with seven interviewed in person, so a guaranteed interview offers a great opportunity to shine.)

We had to provide a written reason for not hiring for all diversity candidates, as well. This went a bit beyond the sentence or two we wrote for each applicant. (Such as “This job is for a Shakespeare specialist, but the candidate is a specialist in contemporary American literature.”)

I dislike anything that smacks of "pity" in any form. I don't know why I am like that, but I am. I don't like handouts and freebies for the poor. I would most likely almost starve before I took them. I am pretty sure we were poor but no one ever used that word. I think I have unwittingly tried all of my life not ever to be a poor pitiful pearl. Now there is a word for something like it; infantilize.... Making someone feel like a helpless baby out of perceived kindness.

[gpk111]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

That is definitely true for Government jobs where there is no need to make a profit or to break even. It has been that way for many years. But, if you own a private business, you really need to hire competent employees or you will soon be out of business.

You just made a good case for small government!

[WesMan]

Originally Posted by amexsbow

For all job applications remove all identifiers. Age, sex/ethnicity/address will NOT be included when applying. College degree will be listed where applicable, without the name of the institution. Date of degree will not be listed. Dates of work history will not be included. Individual identifiers attached to applicants identity will be issued by a third party.

After a pool of candidates are selected from the applications, blind interviews will be conducted. Only after a job offer is made will the employer and employee meet.

Where physical or skill sets are a criteria, a third party will test the applicants.

This will eliminate any hiring bias. Only the best qualified applicants will be hired based on qualifications not personality or appearances.

Correct!!! Thanks

[WesMan]

Originally Posted by Bay Kid

Being told you have to hire X amount of black employees. Isn't that racist? Not X amount of mexicans, jews, or heaven forbid, whites. It is time for change.

Correct!!!! Thanks

[WesMan]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

That is definitely true for Government jobs where there is no need to make a profit or to break even. It has been that way for many years. But, if you own a private business, you really need to hire competent employees or you will soon be out of business.

You re totally correct!!!!!

[WesMan]

Originally Posted by Aloha1

Any time I encounter a question asking what my "race" is, I always answer "other" if that is the only neutral choice, and then fill in the blank with "human". The government is the biggest perpetrator of racial politics and until that is changed equal treatment will never happen.

You are correct, I hate those questions.... The only time race should be consider is for medical review since in some cases race does matter!!!!! Thanks

[Girlcopper]

Originally Posted by Bay Kid

Being told you have to hire X amount of black employees. Isn't that racist? Not X amount of mexicans, jews, or heaven forbid, whites. It is time for change.

Exactly. Just hold interviews like it has been done for decades and let the best person win. Racism is the new key word being thrown around by the lazy who refuse to work, get educated and are the ones committing crimes. And before someone jumps on me....Im not saying ALL.......im saying MANY. Stop putting your hand out for freebies and work for your money

[BlackhawksFan]

The City of Los Angeles as well as some states have enacted laws for something similar as they are trying to ease discrimination in hiring of people with felonies in their background. It's called ban the box law. Employers can not ask about a criminal background until a job offer is made. It's an effort, similar to this suggestion, to put everyone on an equal footing allowing their work history, education, references, appearance and personality to influence hiring instead of whether someone made a poor decision years ago.

I have not heard how well it is working, if at all.

[kendi]

Originally Posted by amexsbow

For all job applications remove all identifiers. Age, sex/ethnicity/address will NOT be included when applying. College degree will be listed where applicable, without the name of the institution. Date of degree will not be listed. Dates of work history will not be included. Individual identifiers attached to applicants identity will be issued by a third party.

After a pool of candidates are selected from the applications, blind interviews will be conducted. Only after a job offer is made will the employer and employee meet.

Where physical or skill sets are a criteria, a third party will test the applicants.

This will eliminate any hiring bias. Only the best qualified applicants will be hired based on qualifications not personality or appearances.

Doubt it. Many employers check out social media sites and do background checks. Can’t hide that information.

[rlcooper70]

Not sure if this is helpful ... but ... Great Psychology Study = people will choose candidates (admission or job) based on political affiliation far more than on race. (Iyengar & Westwood 2015). Goes across both races.

[billethkid]

Originally Posted by rlcooper70

Not sure if this is helpful ... but ... Great Psychology Study = people will choose candidates (admission or job) based on political affiliation far more than on race. (Iyengar & Westwood 2015). Goes across both races.

I personally disagree. Over a 60 year career and hiring at all levels (including GM and CEO types) there was never any need to know/discuss politics.

I can also add that in any interviews where I was the candidate the subject was never was included.

I do not believe I was unique in the above experiences.

[Villagesgal]

What difference would that really make in an "at will" state. Once they show up for work they can be terminated for any reason at all, so again, what difference would that actually make? None.

[mtlee024]

Originally Posted by amexsbow

For all job applications remove all identifiers. Age, sex/ethnicity/address will NOT be included when applying. College degree will be listed where applicable, without the name of the institution. Date of degree will not be listed. Dates of work history will not be included. Individual identifiers attached to applicants identity will be issued by a third party.

After a pool of candidates are selected from the applications, blind interviews will be conducted. Only after a job offer is made will the employer and employee meet.

Where physical or skill sets are a criteria, a third party will test the applicants.

This will eliminate any hiring bias. Only the best qualified applicants will be hired based on qualifications not personality or appearances.

WHat a great idea, what you are saying, in a way, is quit talking about it and maybe, just maybe, it will go away.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

Amazon is well aware of the legal hiring requirements. Here is a link that shows how well they track their workforce to ensure diversity. If they didn't, I think they would be a prime target for the EEOC.

Our workforce data

They gather all of that information AFTER a job offer has been made and accepted. Their workforce is diverse, because most 25-50-year-old white American males don't WANT to work for Amazaon. So they get a lot of women, a lot of immigrants (male and female), a lot of black people (male and female), and a lot of retirees and near-retirees. Of the white folks, many were veterans (they advertise that they encourage veterans and offer special programs for those who end up employees), or on some kind of public assistance.

In the sorting center I worked in as a temp, I was definitely the minority as the white middle-aged adult female who was not also a single mother, or receiving public assistance funding of any kind.

[Duneahh]

Originally Posted by mtlee024

WHat a great idea, what you are saying, in a way, is quit talking about it and maybe, just maybe, it will go away.

Exactly as Morgan Freeman replied to an interview question some years ago about how to stop racism: "STOP talking about it!"