4 ms·

I worked for Miss Lilly Pulitzer once. She was intolerable. The imperious demeanor, the unwillingness to listen to reason, the papered-over cluelessness, it did

I worked for Miss Lilly Pulitzer once. She was intolerable. The imperious demeanor, the unwillingness to listen to reason, the papered-over cluelessness, it did not work out well. Never again! Here's a fun thought: elsethread age discrimination is discussed. If an employer shouldn't be allowed to discriminate by age, should they be allowed to discriminate by class?

retroBunny 10y ago
If an employer shouldn't be allowed to discriminate by age, should they be allowed to discriminate by class? Maybe employers shouldn't ever be allowed to choose anything. Maybe employers should just accept fate, and endure the burdens imposed on them by random chance and fate. With the first person that walks through the door, just give in and let it happen. Small employers, large employers, all employers, one size fits all.
- emodendroket 10y ago
  So what's the claim here? If an employer wants to hire only white men (and no hardscrabble backgrounds, please) regardless of qualifications that should just be allowed? That we should have a permanent underclass instead?
  - aurelianito 10y ago
    I can understand that underprivileged people has to be educated in order to be able to compete. That's why I support quotas for them in universities. But, why is this needed at work? Shouldn't this be solved by the market? If a company only hires white men then you should be at a competitive disadvantage against another company that can chose the best workers from other backgrounds too. Or is this an admission that white men actually perform better than the rest? I don't think so, but maybe the ones who write the policies do.
    - emodendroket 10y ago
      Did you read the article you're commenting on? There are far fewer of these positions than there are applicants and if employers across the board just don't think kids with the "wrong" socioeconomic background are gonna fit in the market isn't going to fix the problem. It seems hard to argue that this is all about merit when the only difference between the hypothetical candidates in the study are class markers and gender.
      - hn_throwaway_99 10y ago
        Parent to your comment is arguing that other law firms should be able to see that highly qualified talent is being undervalued, and those firms would then come in to get that talent to be at an advantage. I don't necessarily agree, but note this Malcolm Gladwell argues in Outliers that this is exactly what happened to Jewish lawyers in NY in the mid 20th century. White shoe firms wouldn't hire the Jewish lawyers, so they started their own firms and focused on "distained" but ultimately highly lucrative areas of law.
        emodendroket 10y ago
        I understood that but I think it is not that likely. What the article describes is that these kids get shunted into less lucrative areas of practice instead. Also I'm pretty suspicious of Gladwell. He spins a good yarn but his work is less than rigorous.
        yummyfajitas 10y ago
        The same story happened in many fields, not just law. Historically, the marked exploiting cheap resources was so pervasive that we generally needed the government to prevent it. For example, to prevent employers from hiring cheaper negroes over whites, we passed Jim Crow and Davis Bacon laws. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis%E2%80%93Bacon_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis%E2%80%93Bacon_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws
  - thaumasiotes 10y ago
    > That we should have a permanent underclass instead? "Instead"? We have one now.

retroBunny 10y ago

If an employer shouldn't be allowed to discriminate by age, should they be allowed to discriminate by class? Maybe employers shouldn't ever be allowed to choose anything. Maybe employers should just accept fate, and endure the burdens imposed on them by random chance and fate. With the first person that walks through the door, just give in and let it happen. Small employers, large employers, all employers, one size fits all.

emodendroket 10y ago
So what's the claim here? If an employer wants to hire only white men (and no hardscrabble backgrounds, please) regardless of qualifications that should just be allowed? That we should have a permanent underclass instead?
- aurelianito 10y ago
  I can understand that underprivileged people has to be educated in order to be able to compete. That's why I support quotas for them in universities. But, why is this needed at work? Shouldn't this be solved by the market? If a company only hires white men then you should be at a competitive disadvantage against another company that can chose the best workers from other backgrounds too. Or is this an admission that white men actually perform better than the rest? I don't think so, but maybe the ones who write the policies do.
  - emodendroket 10y ago
    Did you read the article you're commenting on? There are far fewer of these positions than there are applicants and if employers across the board just don't think kids with the "wrong" socioeconomic background are gonna fit in the market isn't going to fix the problem. It seems hard to argue that this is all about merit when the only difference between the hypothetical candidates in the study are class markers and gender.
    - hn_throwaway_99 10y ago
      Parent to your comment is arguing that other law firms should be able to see that highly qualified talent is being undervalued, and those firms would then come in to get that talent to be at an advantage. I don't necessarily agree, but note this Malcolm Gladwell argues in Outliers that this is exactly what happened to Jewish lawyers in NY in the mid 20th century. White shoe firms wouldn't hire the Jewish lawyers, so they started their own firms and focused on "distained" but ultimately highly lucrative areas of law.
      - emodendroket 10y ago
        I understood that but I think it is not that likely. What the article describes is that these kids get shunted into less lucrative areas of practice instead. Also I'm pretty suspicious of Gladwell. He spins a good yarn but his work is less than rigorous.
        yummyfajitas 10y ago
        The same story happened in many fields, not just law. Historically, the marked exploiting cheap resources was so pervasive that we generally needed the government to prevent it. For example, to prevent employers from hiring cheaper negroes over whites, we passed Jim Crow and Davis Bacon laws. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis%E2%80%93Bacon_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis%E2%80%93Bacon_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws
- thaumasiotes 10y ago
  > That we should have a permanent underclass instead? "Instead"? We have one now.