4 ms·

Why is that a problem? There are countless other "immutable" characteristics on which an employer can discriminate candidates. It ultimately comes down to findi

Why is that a problem? There are countless other "immutable" characteristics on which an employer can discriminate candidates. It ultimately comes down to finding a good fit for the particular culture of the particular workplace. For every candidate that is discriminated at one workplace, there is another workplace which would welcome them and discriminate members from the first workplace.

wizzwizz4 5y ago
Because power dynamics. What if one workplace becomes the next Google? Suddenly, those favoured by that workplace have a large advantage over those discriminated against. But it's usually sectors, rather than individual organisations, that blow up like that, and sectors tend to share culture. Don't think Google; think the entirety of Silicon Valley. You're an [immutable characteristic]? Tough; settle for lower working conditions, or retrain for another job.
sleepysysadmin 5y ago
>Why is that a problem? There are countless other "immutable" characteristics on which an employer can discriminate candidates. Why should there be social equality? Equal opportunity has enabled egalitarian societies to be tremendously successful. You are fundamentally able to use greater talent base per capita than a society which doesn't. The results will force everyone to do this and this is a great thing. A problem arrives in which people arent in equal positions. So for us in Canada we have the legal right to discriminate against people so long as we are doing it to benefit a group defined as 'disadvantaged'. However, that doesn't account for anything. So for example hairdressing which is dominated by women can discriminate against men. Reverse sexism is legal. They call this 'leveling' but it is actually harmful. What you get is a situation in which the 'disadvantaged' are no longer disadvantaged and the advantaged are the disadvantaged.
commandlinefan 5y ago
> discriminate members from the first workplace. Well, no, there isn't. Organizations can and do get sued out of existence for specific types of discrimination.

wizzwizz4 5y ago

Because power dynamics. What if one workplace becomes the next Google? Suddenly, those favoured by that workplace have a large advantage over those discriminated against. But it's usually sectors, rather than individual organisations, that blow up like that, and sectors tend to share culture. Don't think Google; think the entirety of Silicon Valley. You're an [immutable characteristic]? Tough; settle for lower working conditions, or retrain for another job.

sleepysysadmin 5y ago

>Why is that a problem? There are countless other "immutable" characteristics on which an employer can discriminate candidates. Why should there be social equality? Equal opportunity has enabled egalitarian societies to be tremendously successful. You are fundamentally able to use greater talent base per capita than a society which doesn't. The results will force everyone to do this and this is a great thing. A problem arrives in which people arent in equal positions. So for us in Canada we have the legal right to discriminate against people so long as we are doing it to benefit a group defined as 'disadvantaged'. However, that doesn't account for anything. So for example hairdressing which is dominated by women can discriminate against men. Reverse sexism is legal. They call this 'leveling' but it is actually harmful. What you get is a situation in which the 'disadvantaged' are no longer disadvantaged and the advantaged are the disadvantaged.

commandlinefan 5y ago

> discriminate members from the first workplace. Well, no, there isn't. Organizations can and do get sued out of existence for specific types of discrimination.