Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Today's office debate

Hawk

By Hawk,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

Hawk Newbie

Hawk

Posted
Posted

or maybe this is just Hawk's vent...not sure yet!

I'm all for equality etc when it comes to hiring and promotions etc, but if a company that prides itself on being a leader in diversity etc starts publishing targets, isn't that a little backwards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hawk Newbie

Hawk

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So you are talking about the company that you work for then....

yes, that does seem a bit contradictory but you need to further elaborate

yes...the place I currently am. They pride themselves on being an equal opportunity company and they spend loads of money on diversity training and say they are a world leader in equal rights etc.

but, then they go ahead on publish new targets on hiring saying they will hire X amount of females, X amount of minorities and set guidelines for promotions of same etc. They actually also have a Rooney Rule in place now as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captroop Grand Master

Captroop

Posted
Posted

yes...the place I currently am. They pride themselves on being an equal opportunity company and they spend loads of money on diversity training and say they are a world leader in equal rights etc.

but, then they go ahead on publish new targets on hiring saying they will hire X amount of females, X amount of minorities and set guidelines for promotions of same etc. They actually also have a Rooney Rule in place now as well.

Here's something worse. A co-worker of mine in a previous position, was responsible for doing a lot of firing. And the way it worked out is corporate would pass down an order, like "your department needs to cut 5 people." He actually had to do a racial breakdown to make sure the layoffs didn't seem discriminatory. If the least qualified people were all of the same race, he had to lay off a more qualified person (and often a much more qualified person) of a different race just so he could make sure the company couldn't be sued for discrimination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
natty Newbie

natty

Posted
Posted

Any company that 'prides' itself on being diverse is full of poo. Do it because you're not a racist pos, not so you have a new marketing angle. IMO if a company has a good track record then they shouldn't feel threatened by discrimination lawsuits. The burden of proof is on the employee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PanthaSan Apprentice

PanthaSan

Posted
Posted

yes...the place I currently am. They pride themselves on being an equal opportunity company and they spend loads of money on diversity training and say they are a world leader in equal rights etc.

but, then they go ahead on publish new targets on hiring saying they will hire X amount of females, X amount of minorities and set guidelines for promotions of same etc. They actually also have a Rooney Rule in place now as well.

I saw a special on Wal Mart and they never mentioned this....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pstall Newbie

pstall

Posted
Posted

hawk don't get me started. this is easily one of my biggest pet peeves.

the insanity that goes on because of trying to me quota's. i'm seeing entire business channels suffer all because of this.

the irony is there are certainly better qualified minorities(non white male) in a company but mgmt doesn't see them or that group is cool with where they are at.

so they literally will plug someone off the street into a role, to simply say hey look, we are diverse yo.

STUPID

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • DaveThePanther2008
      Grading the Panthers' 2026 Draft Class

      By DaveThePanther2008 · Posted

      Maybe a bit of a homer take but I can't give us a grade lower than A.   Freeling was arguably the best LT prospect in the draft.  His athletic ability is off the chart and at 6'7" that can move.  It was a no brainer pick.   Hunter's key word is Violence. Putting him next to Brown should scare an offensive coordinator. These two give Scourton and Phillips plenty of chances to get one on one opportunities. Brazzell, another tall receiver with sprinter speed.  Our WR room is filled with tall talented WR.  Brazzell is going to give us a WR that can take to roof off the defense.  Basically Jimmy Horn with size. W. Lee III has a nickname of the Blanket. (heard this on the Beleav podcast with J. Stewart)  What a great name.  A great value in the 5th round. Hecht A strong, fast and extremely smart center. Many had him listed as the best center in the draft.  He's most likely a starter sooner than later. Wheatley A good safety in round 5.  Someone who could see playing time.   Kuwatch  I love this pick.  At minimum he will be a key piece on special teams and with some good coaching he'll see some packages where he'll play.  His down piece is he doesn't stay up in the running game.  Good coaching will fix this.  He reminds me a bit of A.J. Klein.   All these picks were great value.  I believe everyone of them were graded higher than the pick we took them.   Dan Morgan is IMO doing a great job turning this team into a good team with great depth.
    • MHS831
      Moton Meets the Press

      By MHS831 · Posted

      Moton is a class act.  
    • Tbe
      Bryce Young 5th year option exercised

      By Tbe · Posted

      Sure, that is possible. That’s what, an extra 55 yards a game on average and 7 more TDs? What if he’s just 15th?  I imagine they would extend him in that situation due to the belief that he’ll keep trending up. maybe a 3 year contract to prove he can be top 10? Sounds like a Tepper plan.
×
×
  • Create New...