29 ms·

Did you not read the article? It says they can't even interview white candidates for jobs.

• csteinbe 11y ago
  Just because they wrote it doesn't mean it's true.
  • CWuestefeld 11y ago
    ...and they showed photos of Powerpoint slides that were pretty damning as well. Sure, those slides could also be faked, but I think that's well past the believable threshold for giving the benefit of a doubt.
• greenrd 11y ago
  If things ever get that extreme, it's time to whip out the research on race and IQ. It's like, well, you asked for it.
• tkmh 11y ago
  Where does it say they can't interview white candidates for jobs?
  • dba7dba 11y ago
    Quote "While their efforts are admirable it is very hard to even interview people who are 'white' which makes things challenging," this person said."
    • tkmh 11y ago
      Gee, a subjective opinion from an anonymous source. I'm convinced. Even if true, "very hard" /= "not allowed".
      • dba7dba 11y ago
        It's not acceptable that there is ANY obstacle to interviewing whites. So imo "very hard" == "not allowed" because it virtually achieves same result.
    • Throwadev 11y ago
      There is no proof that white candidates are hard to interview there. That quote sounds like the kind of thing that could easily be an immature employee who doesn't like the idea of a "VP of diversity", or doesn't like the tone of the VP's slides, taking something small and blowing it out of proportion. Like, they tried to recommend a friend of theirs for an open position and the friend didn't get an interview and suddenly that n=1 case becomes "OMG! They won't let us interview white candidates!!"