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

Recommended Posts

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

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

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

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

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

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.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • No saying he mostly sucks is saying that he doesn’t suck the minority of the time.   Like if he took 17 tests and had a couple of really good showings and a handful of pretty good scores sprinkled in among the typical sub par results.   Like a golfer who went out and shot an 89.  There will be some real nice shots sprinkled in there but at the end of the day it is still 89.    
    • It's worth mentioning... Game 1: Oct 11 in Raleigh. 4-3 OT win with a complete starting lineup. Game 2: Dec 13 in Philly. 4-3 SO win without Jaccob Slavin. Game 3: Dec 14 in Raleigh. 3-2 SO win with a complete starting lineup. Game 4: Apr 13 in Philly. 3-2 SO loss with the AHL roster.  Those early season games were no indication of the Canes team that finished the season. Miller and Ehlers were still trying to figure things out, Nikishin was still a work in progress and the Stankoven line was just another line. Make no mistake, the Canes team Philly will see is nothing close to what they saw at any point in the season. If the top line starts producing, Freddie stays hot and the blue line does what it does, this could be a sweep as well.   
    • He is an employee of the team and speaking on the team's official channel. They arent critical of anything ever.
×
×
  • Create New...