10 ms·

UBC bans non-minority candidates from applying for tenure-track quantum position

112 points by apsec112 5y ago

StanislavPetrov 5y ago
Codified racism, plain and simple.
- littlestymaar 5y ago
  Not racism because it doesn't apply to race minorities only, but also disabilities, sexual orientations, or simply women (which aren't even a minority), but I can still understand that some might find it disturbing.
  - FredPret 5y ago
    So it’s not only racist
  - ericmay 5y ago
    Being a racist has nothing to do with being a minority or not. Let’s not forget that. The typical expression is majority onto minority group, but that is not a requirement. I.e. if I move to China (or your country of choice) I can in fact be racist toward the majority Han Chinese people living there despite me being a white minority. Likewise they may persecute me for my race and that would also be racism. I’d also argue the majority/minority thing is weakened in a global context. Why limit such things to the border of a county, city, or nation state?
  - StanislavPetrov 5y ago
    You're correct, I should have said codified bigotry.
civilized 5y ago
Just to be clear, they seem to be only excluding able-bodied cisgender white men. Which is not to say it's a great policy, but in the interests of precision: > In accordance with UBC’s CRC Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion Action Plan, and pursuant to Section 42 of the BC Human Rights code, the selection will be restricted to members of the following designated groups: persons with disabilities, Indigenous Peoples, women and gender minorities (transgender, gender-fluid, nonbinary and Two-Spirit people), and racialized minorities.
- nickff 5y ago
  It seems like UBC is purposely trying to avoid clarity.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  Section 42: Special programs 42 (1)It is not discrimination or a contravention of this Code to plan, advertise, adopt or implement an employment equity program that (a)has as its objective the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups who are disadvantaged because of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression, and (b)achieves or is reasonably likely to achieve that objective. (2)[Repealed 2002-62-23.] (3)On application by any person, with or without notice to any other person, the commissioner may approve any program or activity that has as its objective the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups. (4)Any program or activity approved under subsection (3) is not in contravention of this Code.
  - kazinator 5y ago
    If you have to stipulate in a legal statute that something is not discrimination, then it's highly probable that that sentence in that statute is the only thing that makes it not discrimination. Someone ignoring that sentence, but otherwise applying sound reasoning, will come to the conclusion that it's discrimination. For instance, if the criminal code said that "a person commits an offense if they thumb their nose at a passing police cruiser", then that would be the one and only sentence which makes that a crime. It could not be deduced from anywhere else.
- riedel 5y ago
  Actually we in Germany ( and I heard similar things about the Netherlands [1] ) have quite a few funding tracks that require gender equity for newly created professorships. In the final consequence many openings need to be restricted to only women so this opening is actually more open. Often the story has a recent prequel in which not enough women could be hired (the reason can be manifold and at least some of them are a result of systematic yet often not immediate discrimination) [1] https://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming/toolkits/gear/examples/tenure-track-positions-female-scientists https://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming/toolkits/gear/ex... Edit: added link
jarbus 5y ago
> In accordance with UBC’s CRC Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion Action Plan, and pursuant to Section 42 of the BC Human Rights code, the selection will be restricted to members of the following designated groups: persons with disabilities, Indigenous Peoples, women and gender minorities (transgender, gender-fluid, nonbinary and Two-Spirit people), and racialized minorities. Applicants to CRC positions are asked to complete this equity survey as part of the application, and candidates from these groups must self-identify as belonging to one or more of the designated equity groups to be considered for the position. Because the search is limited to those self-identifying as members of designated equity groups, candidates must also provide their name to be considered. Oh my god this is nuts
- causality0 5y ago
  - vmception 5y ago
    The pacific northwest, on the Canadian side, has its own divergent terms of inclusivity. Mostly in reference to existing forms of inclusivity that were never controversial in some of the pre-colonial civilizations that already existed there. But require labels and grouping with other edge cases for any meaningful representation and protection in the post-colonial society. That being said, it means the rest of us dont really need to try to match that up with our own forms of inclusivity. It is always important to poll and gauge the consensus. Right now, what goes on in BC/Vancouver with maybe a little spillover into Washington is not representative of anything the rest of us need to be aware of or adapt in our vocabulary as if it is consensus. Useful to know if you’re in vancouver or meet indigenous from vancouver, as there is significant overlap in the inclusionary efforts and indigenous representation.
    - C19is20 5y ago
      Explain like I'm 5?
      - 5y ago
dominotw 5y ago
> Two-Spirit people now this is new.
- olliej 5y ago
  It really isn’t - it’s been a part of many Native (north&south) American cultures forever.
- deagle50 5y ago
  How do you prove this?
- zimpenfish 5y ago
  Mildly new-ish, coined in 1990: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-spirit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-spirit
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  Nope. It's basically just a term used for trans/non-binary people in an indigenous community. For example, We'wha: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We'wha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We'wha The term "two spirit" is relatively new(1990s), but many tribes would have a term for basically "a man who lives as a woman" or vice versa.
- steeleduncan 5y ago
  The first documented evidence of it seems to go back 300 years, most likely it has existed hundreds, if not thousands, of years before that.
- nathanvanfleet 5y ago
  Narrator: it wasn't
Khaine 5y ago
How is this not discrimination of protected classes, and therefore illegal?
- thirtyseven 5y ago
  Because this is in Canada, where they aren't bound by US Supreme Court decisions? Also I don't think straight white cis-male is a protected class in any case.
  - oh_sigh 5y ago
    Is a gay black trans-woman part of a protected class?
  - throw_m239339 5y ago
    > Also I don't think straight white cis-male is a protected class in any case. A disabled "straight white cis-male" isn't a protected class in USA? Stop being racist. We live in crazy times where some form of casual racism is acceptable, because the people who are racist claim they are "anti-racists". You can't be anti-racist if you say racist things, no matter what race is the target.
  - xboxnolifes 5y ago
    The first line of the Canadian Human Right Act is: For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered. (Emphasis mine) Straight, white, cis-male seems to fall under a lot of protected classes.
  - yucky 5y ago
    >I don't think straight white cis-male is a protected class in any case FYI, in the case of protected classes, it covers all people. For instance, if race is a protected class, that doesn't apply to some races, it applies to race in general. In other words, you can't discriminate based on race, regardless of the race being discriminated against. That's how it works in the US, and I know this is Canada but your comment seemed to imply protected class was something else "in any case".
inglor_cz 5y ago
Much like the old kind of racism needed also some whites to stand up and say "we do not want to benefit from this poisonous system, it is repulsive and we reject it", this new kind of racism will only end when at least some people who are intended to benefit from it start organizing and saying aloud "not in my name, I do not want to be treated like this". Individuals do that already (like Sowell or Ayaan Hirsi Ali), but their total numbers haven't yet crossed a critical threshold, so they can be ignored. So far.
- causality0 5y ago
  One must point out it's also likely to foment the classic flavor of racism. If you're there and succeeding as a cisgender white man, you might be inclined to think you're superior to the people eligible for various kinds of assistance, whether any individual actually needed/used it or not. You could carry that sense of superiority or that feeling of resentment the rest of your life.
wffurr 5y ago
Majorly editorialized title for a link to the position posting. IIUC that's not OK by the site guidelines.
- ctoth 5y ago
  So does that change what the site says? Does that change the requirements for the position?
  - littlestymaar 5y ago
    Well, since being a woman is also valid, the title talking about “minorities” is wrong.
    - josteink 5y ago
      Yes. Only straight, white males are explicitly verboten from applying. And it’s ok to discriminate those, right? Right?
      - netizen-936824 5y ago
        That does not matter in this discussion. The discussion is about the title, not whether discrimination is right nor not.
  - wffurr 5y ago
    Glad this got flagged off. What a disaster this entire thread is.
    - wffurr 5y ago
      I am happy to burn some karma calling out this behavior.
jollybean 5y ago
Asian Canadians are overwhelmingly the most over-represented group at UBC and due to this, minorities overall are hugely over-represented at UBC. So do Asians count as White? Minority? Where do the Authorities say today?
- focusgroup0 5y ago
  In 2021, Asians are not Asian, but rather White Adjacent
cactusmatt 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
zomglings 5y ago
My first reaction was, "This is fucking ridiculous!" But after looking at their complete jobs page, it seems like this requirement of being from one of the designated groups may be coming from the source which funds the Canada Research Chair? (see the PDF they link on their job description: https://academic.ubc.ca/sites/vpa.ubc.ca/files/documents/EDIAP%20-%2013%20DEC%202018%20EE.pdf https://academic.ubc.ca/sites/vpa.ubc.ca/files/documents/EDI...) If so, then I don't really see a problem with it. It seems like it is a measure on the part of the government of Canada to increase diversity in technical academia.
- cdot2 5y ago
  I think specifying the race of applicants for positions is bad
  - josteink 5y ago
    One might even call it … racism?
  - zomglings 5y ago
    First of all, they do not only whitelist/blacklist by race. They also whitelist/blacklist by other characteristics (gender, sexual preferences). It seems as if the Canada Research Chair is funded by the national government of Canada specifically to increase diversity in Canadian academia. It just so happens that UBC is hosting one position for quantum computing. Presumably there are other Canada Research Chairs available at other universities. Presumably, the government of Canada also offers funding for positions that does not discriminate based on the designations that this particular funding does discriminate on. Maybe the overall allocation of national funds to academic positions is not as biased as we may think just by looking at this job posting. All I'm saying is, if the source of the funding is the national government, then a knee-jerk reaction against UBC is irrational without because it doesn't take into account the national effects of higher education funding by the Canadian government. (Also, how is this different from any number of fellowships offered in the US higher education system to women and minorities?)
    - 5y ago
Spooky23 5y ago
Do you get questioned on your self-expression of status? If I were to express that my gender is non-binary, as I don't identify as any particular gender in the context of job interviews, would that be a problem?
- wheelinsupial 5y ago
  > Do you get questioned on your self-expression of status? I’ve started to apply for jobs in the Vancouver region again and there is a place for self-reporting your race, gender, sexuality, disability, and possibly other information. You can leave it blank or you can enter it in. Options for non-binary are present and so are is asexual, as an example. I don’t know if this is representative of the market or not. I know my employer has asked everyone to update that information for all existing employees. Canada is pretty diverse, but the diversity is localized in a handful of large metro areas from what I can see by going through the available census information. I’m not sure if I’ve answered your question or not?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago
I hope someone sues them and wins. If anyone knows how to help make that happen do tell.
humanistbot 5y ago
In this thread: A bunch of people from the U.S. not realizing that employment laws and norms are quite different in Canada, where this kind of "employment equity" (or what is called "affirmative action" in the U.S.) is required, especially for public institutions.
- bruiseralmighty 5y ago
  I guess it is always just sort of gross to view such blatant discrimination head-on regardless of where its happening. I suppose in the U.S. we just sort of brush this under the rug by allowing a hiring board to say it behind closed doors rather than making it public and in print.
- boardwaalk 5y ago
  Or you could be not realizing that people are uncomfortable with it regardless of those "laws and norms." It's tempting to bring up something else more severe to prove the point: Should we be okay with what's happening with the Uyghurs in China because it's not happening here (wherever that is)? I would say no.
ulrashida 5y ago
The poster should revise their headline as it is inaccurate. A job posting that is aimed at female applicants (among other groups) is hardly "non-minority". It is definitely a diversity targeted policy.
- xondono 5y ago
  It might be an honest mistake. The definition of “minority” is one of those things that is very fluid lately.
kazinator 5y ago
I wonder. Can this position go to a person of East Asian descent? So that is to say, in the geographical area of UBC, the demographics being what they are, does that count as a "racialized minority"? Or, never mind that, how about in consideration of the existing high representation of that group in STEM fields? If they mean "non-white OK", they should write that, otherwise someone of East Asian descent has no idea whether to bother applying.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  > Can this position go to a person of East Asian descent? Sure, women can apply and get the role, I'm almost certain an east (or maybe south?) asian female will get this position given the demographics of talent available in that field.
  - kazinator 5y ago
    Of course, I'm referring to a person who is not eligible in the other minority categories; someone who can only play the race card. I do not intend to pose a puzzle question in which a logical short-cut provides a correct answer based on nothing but the syntax of the question and trivial surrounding information.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      The question was "Can this position go to someone of East Asian descent?" and the answer is "yes, it most probably will." I'm guessing you meant "heterosexual male of East Asian descent"? Because, I'm guessing that category is excluded along with "white heterosexual males."
josteink 5y ago
So everyone except white, straight males then?
beaconstudios 5y ago
Again with the application of systemic change at the individual level. You hate to see it. If I wanted to solve the problem (assuming it were perceived as such, due to males not getting the opportunity to be a nurse where they otherwise would want to) of nursing being predominantly a female profession, which option do I choose: - investigate whether there are institutional (hiring bias, biased availability etc), cultural (nursing treated as "for girls"), or systemic (nursing careers primarily promoted in female-coded environments) reasons why males are seeing reduced opportunity to access nursing as a career - just put up a sign saying "hiring male nurses", completely ignoring the raised concern about lack of opportunity to look good to a particular twisted perspective on systemic issues It bothers me every time I see it. Even without the immorality of excluding people based on immutable features.
gcau 5y ago
I think people should be treated based on the content of their character and not by the colour of their skin.
eganist 5y ago
Going from the code: > Special programs 42 > (1)It is not discrimination or a contravention of this Code to plan, advertise, adopt or implement an employment equity program that > (a)has as its objective the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups who are disadvantaged because of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression, and > (b)achieves or is reasonably likely to achieve that objective. > (2)[Repealed 2002-62-23.] > (3)On application by any person, with or without notice to any other person, the commissioner may approve any program or activity that has as its objective the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups. > (4)Any program or activity approved under subsection (3) is not in contravention of this Code. It's fair to assume they have a representation gap that they need to ameliorate among their current tenured quantum researchers, hence the hiring restriction. No comments on whether or not that's "right" or "wrong," but that's the inference.
nickdothutton 5y ago
I’m not sure normalising employers ability to specify the acceptable set of races of applicants is such a good idea.
olliej 5y ago
Is this clunky? Yes. Is there a better way of doing it? Maybe. Is it an explicitly biased policy? Yes. However, correcting a biased system requires that there is a period with enforced change bias to correct the existing bias. This is because there are many ways previous explicitly biased policies entrench that bias even if the current environment is no longer explicitly biased. Even if we were to assume that everyone is suddenly 0% biased on anything, a lack of explicit corrective actions will necessarily be long and dragged out continuing to harm the classes that are no longer explicitly discriminated against. So given we know that hiring biases do still exist, and we know that many groups are underrepresented due to historical biases we end up stuck trying to fix a complex problem with very clunky binary tools. As a very simple example: imagine you have a job where the starting rate for one group is $2 and for the other group it’s $1. Everything else is fair people get raises at the same rate (eg 10% or something). Then one day the law says “no, that’s bullshit”, and now everyone’s starting rate is $2. At this point all the people who were already employed are still earning half as much as their colleagues, despite the policies now being completely “fair”. If you just leave things as they are, eventually things will end up equal across both groups, but you have a potentially multiple generation latency. You could tried to correct the incomes, but that looks like discrimination: “we’re doubling the income of everyone in group B, group A is explicitly excluded”. The thing is in this case, even with this biased 2x income, the disadvantaged group is still worse off, due to the years of unfair compensation. If you try to correct for that you end up with another super biased behaviour. What we’re seeing is an attempt to correct historical biases, and any such correction is necessarily biased, because otherwise even a perfectly unbiased continues to harm historical victims.
- WkndTriathlete 5y ago
  > However, correcting a biased system requires that there is a period with enforced change bias to correct the existing bias. I guess all my calculus and systems theory textbooks were wrong, then. Seriously, though, there are myriad problems with this premise: a) It implicitly assumes that the system itself is biased instead of its inputs. b) It assumes that the system isn't already being corrected based on the first- or second-derivative on the inputs. c) Feedback loops (enforced change bias) can result in nasty exponential on oscillational responses. And in the context of the code itself: d) The code assumes the problem is systemic across all public departments and thus must apply to all of them; e) The code makes suitability to position (which is the point of hiring a professor) secondary to considerations irrelevant to the position. (Plain English: given two candidates, an old, experienced, non-racist white guy who tries to each and encourage all of his students vs. any candidate of one of the protected classes whose biases run toward their protected class, you must hire the biased candidate. And you can't tell if they are biased because the current environment enables that candidate to continue their bias in the current environment, which is to attempt to lift up those protected classes at any cost - if they exclude other protected classes or "white guys" it won't show up as a negative on the demographic statistics assembled.) I agree there is a discrimination problem with certain people, but I don't think the solution is ever going to come from legislation like this. I think the solution has to be grass-roots and be done by gradually retiring out those with generational unconscious bias or by firing those that are outright discriminatory, and by gradually hiring in a younger generation that is (hopefully) less discriminatory. That's a lot more work than making a half-assed law and winning votes because of that law, though.
aaomidi 5y ago
Meanwhile UBC to international students: In Christmas holidays we close the dorms. Oh? Oh what's that? You don't have a place to stay? Well. Too fucking bad. Go find an extremely expensive hotel. Oh what's that? The hotels are charging 500/night? Well. Sucks to be you then? Maybe fly back home during the holidays. Oh but wait, you're worried about covid? Well. that really sucks doesn't it. So sad. This news literally feels like someone is trying to actively make the situation so stupid that other diversification efforts are also put on pause.
tomas_nort 5y ago
joeman1000 5y ago
How is this not racial discrimination? If ‘positive racism’ is disallowed then surely outright discrimination shouldn’t be allowed either, right?
CodeGlitch 5y ago
It's fine. I'll just put down I'm gender fluid, and I'll just always turn up to work as a guy. If anyone questions it I'll claim I change at night in the privacy of my own home.

112 points by apsec112 5y ago

StanislavPetrov 5y ago

Codified racism, plain and simple.

littlestymaar 5y ago
Not racism because it doesn't apply to race minorities only, but also disabilities, sexual orientations, or simply women (which aren't even a minority), but I can still understand that some might find it disturbing.
- FredPret 5y ago
  So it’s not only racist
- ericmay 5y ago
  Being a racist has nothing to do with being a minority or not. Let’s not forget that. The typical expression is majority onto minority group, but that is not a requirement. I.e. if I move to China (or your country of choice) I can in fact be racist toward the majority Han Chinese people living there despite me being a white minority. Likewise they may persecute me for my race and that would also be racism. I’d also argue the majority/minority thing is weakened in a global context. Why limit such things to the border of a county, city, or nation state?
- StanislavPetrov 5y ago
  You're correct, I should have said codified bigotry.

civilized 5y ago

Just to be clear, they seem to be only excluding able-bodied cisgender white men. Which is not to say it's a great policy, but in the interests of precision: > In accordance with UBC’s CRC Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion Action Plan, and pursuant to Section 42 of the BC Human Rights code, the selection will be restricted to members of the following designated groups: persons with disabilities, Indigenous Peoples, women and gender minorities (transgender, gender-fluid, nonbinary and Two-Spirit people), and racialized minorities.

nickff 5y ago
It seems like UBC is purposely trying to avoid clarity.
oh_sigh 5y ago
Section 42: Special programs 42 (1)It is not discrimination or a contravention of this Code to plan, advertise, adopt or implement an employment equity program that (a)has as its objective the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups who are disadvantaged because of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression, and (b)achieves or is reasonably likely to achieve that objective. (2)[Repealed 2002-62-23.] (3)On application by any person, with or without notice to any other person, the commissioner may approve any program or activity that has as its objective the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups. (4)Any program or activity approved under subsection (3) is not in contravention of this Code.
- kazinator 5y ago
  If you have to stipulate in a legal statute that something is not discrimination, then it's highly probable that that sentence in that statute is the only thing that makes it not discrimination. Someone ignoring that sentence, but otherwise applying sound reasoning, will come to the conclusion that it's discrimination. For instance, if the criminal code said that "a person commits an offense if they thumb their nose at a passing police cruiser", then that would be the one and only sentence which makes that a crime. It could not be deduced from anywhere else.
riedel 5y ago
Actually we in Germany ( and I heard similar things about the Netherlands [1] ) have quite a few funding tracks that require gender equity for newly created professorships. In the final consequence many openings need to be restricted to only women so this opening is actually more open. Often the story has a recent prequel in which not enough women could be hired (the reason can be manifold and at least some of them are a result of systematic yet often not immediate discrimination) [1] https://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming/toolkits/gear/examples/tenure-track-positions-female-scientists https://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming/toolkits/gear/ex... Edit: added link

jarbus 5y ago

> In accordance with UBC’s CRC Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion Action Plan, and pursuant to Section 42 of the BC Human Rights code, the selection will be restricted to members of the following designated groups: persons with disabilities, Indigenous Peoples, women and gender minorities (transgender, gender-fluid, nonbinary and Two-Spirit people), and racialized minorities. Applicants to CRC positions are asked to complete this equity survey as part of the application, and candidates from these groups must self-identify as belonging to one or more of the designated equity groups to be considered for the position. Because the search is limited to those self-identifying as members of designated equity groups, candidates must also provide their name to be considered. Oh my god this is nuts

causality0 5y ago
- vmception 5y ago
  The pacific northwest, on the Canadian side, has its own divergent terms of inclusivity. Mostly in reference to existing forms of inclusivity that were never controversial in some of the pre-colonial civilizations that already existed there. But require labels and grouping with other edge cases for any meaningful representation and protection in the post-colonial society. That being said, it means the rest of us dont really need to try to match that up with our own forms of inclusivity. It is always important to poll and gauge the consensus. Right now, what goes on in BC/Vancouver with maybe a little spillover into Washington is not representative of anything the rest of us need to be aware of or adapt in our vocabulary as if it is consensus. Useful to know if you’re in vancouver or meet indigenous from vancouver, as there is significant overlap in the inclusionary efforts and indigenous representation.
  - C19is20 5y ago
    Explain like I'm 5?
    - 5y ago

dominotw 5y ago

> Two-Spirit people now this is new.

olliej 5y ago
It really isn’t - it’s been a part of many Native (north&south) American cultures forever.
deagle50 5y ago
How do you prove this?
zimpenfish 5y ago
Mildly new-ish, coined in 1990: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-spirit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-spirit
oh_sigh 5y ago
Nope. It's basically just a term used for trans/non-binary people in an indigenous community. For example, We'wha: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We'wha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We'wha The term "two spirit" is relatively new(1990s), but many tribes would have a term for basically "a man who lives as a woman" or vice versa.
steeleduncan 5y ago
The first documented evidence of it seems to go back 300 years, most likely it has existed hundreds, if not thousands, of years before that.
nathanvanfleet 5y ago
Narrator: it wasn't

Khaine 5y ago

How is this not discrimination of protected classes, and therefore illegal?

thirtyseven 5y ago
Because this is in Canada, where they aren't bound by US Supreme Court decisions? Also I don't think straight white cis-male is a protected class in any case.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  Is a gay black trans-woman part of a protected class?
- throw_m239339 5y ago
  > Also I don't think straight white cis-male is a protected class in any case. A disabled "straight white cis-male" isn't a protected class in USA? Stop being racist. We live in crazy times where some form of casual racism is acceptable, because the people who are racist claim they are "anti-racists". You can't be anti-racist if you say racist things, no matter what race is the target.
- xboxnolifes 5y ago
  The first line of the Canadian Human Right Act is: For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered. (Emphasis mine) Straight, white, cis-male seems to fall under a lot of protected classes.
- yucky 5y ago
  >I don't think straight white cis-male is a protected class in any case FYI, in the case of protected classes, it covers all people. For instance, if race is a protected class, that doesn't apply to some races, it applies to race in general. In other words, you can't discriminate based on race, regardless of the race being discriminated against. That's how it works in the US, and I know this is Canada but your comment seemed to imply protected class was something else "in any case".

inglor_cz 5y ago

Much like the old kind of racism needed also some whites to stand up and say "we do not want to benefit from this poisonous system, it is repulsive and we reject it", this new kind of racism will only end when at least some people who are intended to benefit from it start organizing and saying aloud "not in my name, I do not want to be treated like this". Individuals do that already (like Sowell or Ayaan Hirsi Ali), but their total numbers haven't yet crossed a critical threshold, so they can be ignored. So far.

causality0 5y ago
One must point out it's also likely to foment the classic flavor of racism. If you're there and succeeding as a cisgender white man, you might be inclined to think you're superior to the people eligible for various kinds of assistance, whether any individual actually needed/used it or not. You could carry that sense of superiority or that feeling of resentment the rest of your life.

wffurr 5y ago

Majorly editorialized title for a link to the position posting. IIUC that's not OK by the site guidelines.

ctoth 5y ago
So does that change what the site says? Does that change the requirements for the position?
- littlestymaar 5y ago
  Well, since being a woman is also valid, the title talking about “minorities” is wrong.
  - josteink 5y ago
    Yes. Only straight, white males are explicitly verboten from applying. And it’s ok to discriminate those, right? Right?
    - netizen-936824 5y ago
      That does not matter in this discussion. The discussion is about the title, not whether discrimination is right nor not.
- wffurr 5y ago
  Glad this got flagged off. What a disaster this entire thread is.
  - wffurr 5y ago
    I am happy to burn some karma calling out this behavior.

jollybean 5y ago

Asian Canadians are overwhelmingly the most over-represented group at UBC and due to this, minorities overall are hugely over-represented at UBC. So do Asians count as White? Minority? Where do the Authorities say today?

focusgroup0 5y ago
In 2021, Asians are not Asian, but rather White Adjacent

cactusmatt 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

zomglings 5y ago

My first reaction was, "This is fucking ridiculous!" But after looking at their complete jobs page, it seems like this requirement of being from one of the designated groups may be coming from the source which funds the Canada Research Chair? (see the PDF they link on their job description: https://academic.ubc.ca/sites/vpa.ubc.ca/files/documents/EDIAP%20-%2013%20DEC%202018%20EE.pdf https://academic.ubc.ca/sites/vpa.ubc.ca/files/documents/EDI...) If so, then I don't really see a problem with it. It seems like it is a measure on the part of the government of Canada to increase diversity in technical academia.

cdot2 5y ago
I think specifying the race of applicants for positions is bad
- josteink 5y ago
  One might even call it … racism?
- zomglings 5y ago
  First of all, they do not only whitelist/blacklist by race. They also whitelist/blacklist by other characteristics (gender, sexual preferences). It seems as if the Canada Research Chair is funded by the national government of Canada specifically to increase diversity in Canadian academia. It just so happens that UBC is hosting one position for quantum computing. Presumably there are other Canada Research Chairs available at other universities. Presumably, the government of Canada also offers funding for positions that does not discriminate based on the designations that this particular funding does discriminate on. Maybe the overall allocation of national funds to academic positions is not as biased as we may think just by looking at this job posting. All I'm saying is, if the source of the funding is the national government, then a knee-jerk reaction against UBC is irrational without because it doesn't take into account the national effects of higher education funding by the Canadian government. (Also, how is this different from any number of fellowships offered in the US higher education system to women and minorities?)
  - 5y ago

Spooky23 5y ago

Do you get questioned on your self-expression of status? If I were to express that my gender is non-binary, as I don't identify as any particular gender in the context of job interviews, would that be a problem?

wheelinsupial 5y ago
> Do you get questioned on your self-expression of status? I’ve started to apply for jobs in the Vancouver region again and there is a place for self-reporting your race, gender, sexuality, disability, and possibly other information. You can leave it blank or you can enter it in. Options for non-binary are present and so are is asexual, as an example. I don’t know if this is representative of the market or not. I know my employer has asked everyone to update that information for all existing employees. Canada is pretty diverse, but the diversity is localized in a handful of large metro areas from what I can see by going through the available census information. I’m not sure if I’ve answered your question or not?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

NoImmatureAdHom 5y ago

I hope someone sues them and wins. If anyone knows how to help make that happen do tell.

humanistbot 5y ago

In this thread: A bunch of people from the U.S. not realizing that employment laws and norms are quite different in Canada, where this kind of "employment equity" (or what is called "affirmative action" in the U.S.) is required, especially for public institutions.

bruiseralmighty 5y ago
I guess it is always just sort of gross to view such blatant discrimination head-on regardless of where its happening. I suppose in the U.S. we just sort of brush this under the rug by allowing a hiring board to say it behind closed doors rather than making it public and in print.
boardwaalk 5y ago
Or you could be not realizing that people are uncomfortable with it regardless of those "laws and norms." It's tempting to bring up something else more severe to prove the point: Should we be okay with what's happening with the Uyghurs in China because it's not happening here (wherever that is)? I would say no.

ulrashida 5y ago

The poster should revise their headline as it is inaccurate. A job posting that is aimed at female applicants (among other groups) is hardly "non-minority". It is definitely a diversity targeted policy.

xondono 5y ago
It might be an honest mistake. The definition of “minority” is one of those things that is very fluid lately.

kazinator 5y ago

I wonder. Can this position go to a person of East Asian descent? So that is to say, in the geographical area of UBC, the demographics being what they are, does that count as a "racialized minority"? Or, never mind that, how about in consideration of the existing high representation of that group in STEM fields? If they mean "non-white OK", they should write that, otherwise someone of East Asian descent has no idea whether to bother applying.

seanmcdirmid 5y ago
> Can this position go to a person of East Asian descent? Sure, women can apply and get the role, I'm almost certain an east (or maybe south?) asian female will get this position given the demographics of talent available in that field.
- kazinator 5y ago
  Of course, I'm referring to a person who is not eligible in the other minority categories; someone who can only play the race card. I do not intend to pose a puzzle question in which a logical short-cut provides a correct answer based on nothing but the syntax of the question and trivial surrounding information.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    The question was "Can this position go to someone of East Asian descent?" and the answer is "yes, it most probably will." I'm guessing you meant "heterosexual male of East Asian descent"? Because, I'm guessing that category is excluded along with "white heterosexual males."

josteink 5y ago

So everyone except white, straight males then?

beaconstudios 5y ago

Again with the application of systemic change at the individual level. You hate to see it. If I wanted to solve the problem (assuming it were perceived as such, due to males not getting the opportunity to be a nurse where they otherwise would want to) of nursing being predominantly a female profession, which option do I choose: - investigate whether there are institutional (hiring bias, biased availability etc), cultural (nursing treated as "for girls"), or systemic (nursing careers primarily promoted in female-coded environments) reasons why males are seeing reduced opportunity to access nursing as a career - just put up a sign saying "hiring male nurses", completely ignoring the raised concern about lack of opportunity to look good to a particular twisted perspective on systemic issues It bothers me every time I see it. Even without the immorality of excluding people based on immutable features.

gcau 5y ago

I think people should be treated based on the content of their character and not by the colour of their skin.

eganist 5y ago

Going from the code: > Special programs 42 > (1)It is not discrimination or a contravention of this Code to plan, advertise, adopt or implement an employment equity program that > (a)has as its objective the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups who are disadvantaged because of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression, and > (b)achieves or is reasonably likely to achieve that objective. > (2)[Repealed 2002-62-23.] > (3)On application by any person, with or without notice to any other person, the commissioner may approve any program or activity that has as its objective the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups. > (4)Any program or activity approved under subsection (3) is not in contravention of this Code. It's fair to assume they have a representation gap that they need to ameliorate among their current tenured quantum researchers, hence the hiring restriction. No comments on whether or not that's "right" or "wrong," but that's the inference.

nickdothutton 5y ago

I’m not sure normalising employers ability to specify the acceptable set of races of applicants is such a good idea.

olliej 5y ago

Is this clunky? Yes. Is there a better way of doing it? Maybe. Is it an explicitly biased policy? Yes. However, correcting a biased system requires that there is a period with enforced change bias to correct the existing bias. This is because there are many ways previous explicitly biased policies entrench that bias even if the current environment is no longer explicitly biased. Even if we were to assume that everyone is suddenly 0% biased on anything, a lack of explicit corrective actions will necessarily be long and dragged out continuing to harm the classes that are no longer explicitly discriminated against. So given we know that hiring biases do still exist, and we know that many groups are underrepresented due to historical biases we end up stuck trying to fix a complex problem with very clunky binary tools. As a very simple example: imagine you have a job where the starting rate for one group is $2 and for the other group it’s $1. Everything else is fair people get raises at the same rate (eg 10% or something). Then one day the law says “no, that’s bullshit”, and now everyone’s starting rate is $2. At this point all the people who were already employed are still earning half as much as their colleagues, despite the policies now being completely “fair”. If you just leave things as they are, eventually things will end up equal across both groups, but you have a potentially multiple generation latency. You could tried to correct the incomes, but that looks like discrimination: “we’re doubling the income of everyone in group B, group A is explicitly excluded”. The thing is in this case, even with this biased 2x income, the disadvantaged group is still worse off, due to the years of unfair compensation. If you try to correct for that you end up with another super biased behaviour. What we’re seeing is an attempt to correct historical biases, and any such correction is necessarily biased, because otherwise even a perfectly unbiased continues to harm historical victims.

WkndTriathlete 5y ago
> However, correcting a biased system requires that there is a period with enforced change bias to correct the existing bias. I guess all my calculus and systems theory textbooks were wrong, then. Seriously, though, there are myriad problems with this premise: a) It implicitly assumes that the system itself is biased instead of its inputs. b) It assumes that the system isn't already being corrected based on the first- or second-derivative on the inputs. c) Feedback loops (enforced change bias) can result in nasty exponential on oscillational responses. And in the context of the code itself: d) The code assumes the problem is systemic across all public departments and thus must apply to all of them; e) The code makes suitability to position (which is the point of hiring a professor) secondary to considerations irrelevant to the position. (Plain English: given two candidates, an old, experienced, non-racist white guy who tries to each and encourage all of his students vs. any candidate of one of the protected classes whose biases run toward their protected class, you must hire the biased candidate. And you can't tell if they are biased because the current environment enables that candidate to continue their bias in the current environment, which is to attempt to lift up those protected classes at any cost - if they exclude other protected classes or "white guys" it won't show up as a negative on the demographic statistics assembled.) I agree there is a discrimination problem with certain people, but I don't think the solution is ever going to come from legislation like this. I think the solution has to be grass-roots and be done by gradually retiring out those with generational unconscious bias or by firing those that are outright discriminatory, and by gradually hiring in a younger generation that is (hopefully) less discriminatory. That's a lot more work than making a half-assed law and winning votes because of that law, though.

aaomidi 5y ago

Meanwhile UBC to international students: In Christmas holidays we close the dorms. Oh? Oh what's that? You don't have a place to stay? Well. Too fucking bad. Go find an extremely expensive hotel. Oh what's that? The hotels are charging 500/night? Well. Sucks to be you then? Maybe fly back home during the holidays. Oh but wait, you're worried about covid? Well. that really sucks doesn't it. So sad. This news literally feels like someone is trying to actively make the situation so stupid that other diversification efforts are also put on pause.

tomas_nort 5y ago

joeman1000 5y ago

How is this not racial discrimination? If ‘positive racism’ is disallowed then surely outright discrimination shouldn’t be allowed either, right?

CodeGlitch 5y ago

It's fine. I'll just put down I'm gender fluid, and I'll just always turn up to work as a guy. If anyone questions it I'll claim I change at night in the privacy of my own home.