5 ms·
I know I'm not the normal, but this doesn't bother me. I believe that in the marketplace of ideas, the best ideas tend to win out, and if hiring "non-white mal
by bmelton 11y ago
I know I'm not the normal, but this doesn't bother me. I believe that in the marketplace of ideas, the best ideas tend to win out, and if hiring "non-white males" is the best idea, then more power to them. Fighting discrimination with discrimination might or might not prove to be an effective tactic, but it certainly doesn't paint a pretty picture.
On the flip side, in America this violates EEOC laws, and is pretty clearly illegal. Someone in a position to hire ought to be aware of this.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoIts not evil to recruit, trying to level your employee demographic. Labelling everything 'discrimination' is lazy. Intent colors the issue.
- ra1n85 11y agoScaachi Koul: "You owe these pale demons nothing". Intent certainly does color the issue.
- bmelton 11y agoRefusal to consider someone's application on matters of race is prima facie discrimination. Calling discrimination what it is might be lazy, but it's also very accurate. Legally speaking, there are a variety of ways to promote diversity that are, for better or worse, legal. Internal memorandums insisting that diversity is a key company value, for example, is in fact anti-discriminatory, though it might sometimes end with a result that sacrifices the best potential candidate for someone who can add a unique perspective. That said, suggesting that white people need not apply is not remotely the same thing as promoting diversity, and co-statements that highlight the ills of white people put too fine a point on it. FWIW, I'm of the opinion that I think a given person should be able to hire whomever they want. If that means that BuzzFeed Canada hires zero white people, then so be it. But that doesn't change that the laws as they are do not generally allow for this (with certain exceptions -- like hiring Chinese people exclusively to staff an authentic Chinese restaurant).
- humanrebar 11y ago> Internal memorandums insisting that diversity is a key company value, for example, is in fact anti-discriminatory... I'll disagree here. What counts as diversity is fairly arbitrary. Choosing what counts as diverse is inherently discriminatory. Are veterans underrepresented? Are transpeople? Are people with irrelevant but chronic health issues? Do the age ranges of employees match the regional (neighborhood, city, province, national, international... yes it's impossible to do all at once) demographics? And because people are diverse and unique, shops can definitely find a diverse group of people that talk, act, and think the same way. Does that still count as diversity?
- bmelton 11y agoVery fair point. As a slight point of clarification, let me amend my statement to this: > Internal memorandums insisting that diversity is a key company value, for example, is *legally considered" anti-discriminatory
- humanrebar 11y agoFair enough. If Indiana can declare pi to be 3.14, I guess another legal body can declare explicit preferences to be anti-discriminatory. Laws require power, not logic, to be enacted.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- mcphage 11y ago> On the flip side, in America this violates EEOC laws, and is pretty clearly illegal. Someone in a position to hire ought to be aware of this. This is for BuzzFeed Canada.
- bmelton 11y agoUnderstood, and why I specifically stated "in America". That said, while I do not study Canadian law in any capacity, I would wager that this is also illegal in Canada under the Canadian Human Rights Act. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/fulltext.html http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/fulltext.html
- mcphage 11y ago> Understood, and why I specifically stated "in America". Then I don't understand your comment. What's the point of mentioning it's illegal in a different country?
- hitekker 11y agoWould you be fine with them saying hiring "only white males" in Canada? Or hiring "only white" in Australia?
- bmelton 11y agoI would. Moreover, I would be perfectly happy with them advertising as such, so that I could know that they were assholes, and happily give my money to their competitors. Instead, the system we get is one in which everyone pretends to be inclusive, and I end up inadvertently giving money to organizations like Chik-Fil-A.
- taternuts 11y agoTo play devils advocate, if a company were this honest in their recruitment ads it would save a lot of people the trouble of interviewing there to see if they think it's a culture fit. Are you racist too? No? Keep looking!
- rpgmaker 11y agoI think the conscious push to diversify the workplace it's good but I don't think that outright banning white males is the right way to go about it.
- bjacobel 11y agoWhat part of the original tweet suggested an outright ban on white male applicants?
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- cperciva 11y agothe Canadian constitution explicitly allows certain discrimination on the basis of race, gender etc. if it is for the purpose of lifting up minority groups. The Constitution concerns actions taken by the government (or, in some cases, by agents of the government), so it's not relevant here. The analogous rules for private corporations are in provincial Human Rights Codes.
- kelukelugames 11y agoEEOC has won on cases of discrimination against white males. But if Buzzfeed already has a decent number of white males then this wouldn't qualify. However, EEOC cites a homogenous workforce of any group might lead to issues.
- ryanSrich 11y agoThis is happening more and more in the US with tech companies taking a diversity pledge. I assume there's some loophole that they are getting around.