Titanic99   10 #169 Posted September 23, 2008 So you agree then discrimination ? Maybe you should ask your 6 year old to explain what that word means  Try reading the posts, the poster indicated that recruitment will no longer be based on merit, clearly this is not the case. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Wildcat   10 #170 Posted September 23, 2008 Not how it reads to me... The positive discrimination plan would apply only in cases where two equally qualified candidates were after the same post, allowing the employer to tip the balance in favour of the minority candidate on grounds of race or gender.   No mention of merit there is there?  Not if you look at a distorted news article.  Here is what the Govt response to the consultation document says (July 2008):  "We will extend positive action so that employers can take into account, where they feel it is appropriate, when selecting between two equally qualified candidates, under-representation of disadvantaged groups, for example women and people from ethnic minority communities."  Ref  In other words in a situation where two people are equally qualified where they would previously flip a coin they would be able to give a reason for their selection based on under-representation. Practically it makes no difference to the decision the only difference would be the explanation they give for the decision.  It is not even at the Bill stage, it is still a long way from legislation and is a very minor point, with practically no impact. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
newvanandman   10 #171 Posted September 23, 2008 Try reading the posts, the poster indicated that recruitment will no longer be based on merit, clearly this is not the case. sorry if ive misread,i was asked for an example of discrimination against white people in their own country and gave one,theres plenty more,but they seem to have gone quiet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
newvanandman   10 #172 Posted September 23, 2008 Not if you look at a distorted news article.  Here is what the Govt response to the consultation document says (July 2008):  "We will extend positive action so that employers can take into account, where they feel it is appropriate, when selecting between two equally qualified candidates, under-representation of disadvantaged groups, for example women and people from ethnic minority communities."  Ref  In other words in a situation where two people are equally qualified where they would previously flip a coin they would be able to give a reason for their selection based on under-representation. Practically it makes no difference to the decision the only difference would be the explanation they give for the decision.  It is not even at the Bill stage, it is still a long way from legislation and is a very minor point, with practically no impact. It wouldnt be minor if we changed the word white to black now would it and thats the point,people in this country although very receptive of people from other countries feel that they are second rate in their own country and that is not acceptable to many. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
boyfriday   21 #173 Posted September 23, 2008 Not how it reads to me... The positive discrimination plan would apply only in cases where two equally qualified candidates were after the same post, allowing the employer to tip the balance in favour of the minority candidate on grounds of race or gender.   No mention of merit there is there?  ..note the key word 'allowing', no reference to the employer being compelled to employ a female or ethnic minority candidate, and as Titanic says, it doesn't allow for the appointment of inferior candidates, they woud have to be equally capable, even then the employer would be allowed to employ whoever they wanted to.   ..still no glowing endorsements on the performance of the Rotherham BNP councillors? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
upholder   10 #174 Posted September 23, 2008 Except we don't  I'm talking about gas and electricity prices, not petrol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Wildcat   10 #175 Posted September 23, 2008 "White men could be legally blocked from jobs or promotions under controversial government plans to help women and black employees achieve equality" If you replaced the word white with the word black,i wonder what reactions that would raise??  I suspect people would say the same as I am saying now that the statement would be intentionally misleading.  The proposal could after all be used to justify the appointment of a white person if they are under represented, so you could use black or white interchangeably in the statement you have highlighted and both would be true. By only telling half a story the sentence is misleading.  "blocked for promotion" is also misleading, where the proposal has no impact on selection on merit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
samesame monkey   10 #176 Posted September 23, 2008 I'm talking about gas and electricity prices, not petrol.  reuters seems to show that we pay less for gas, or at least we did in February. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
upholder   10 #177 Posted September 23, 2008 What the heck are you on about, my six year old could understand this. It does not remove selection on merit, it is still the case that the best candidate will get the job and only if they are equal can discrimination on grounds of race be made.  Calm down old bean, you'll do yourself an injury  An employer should be allowed to employ anyone they wish without Government interferance for the sake of getting more ethnic minorities into jobs.  "discrimination on grounds of race"  That's why people are turning to the BNP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
boyfriday   21 #178 Posted September 23, 2008 Calm down old bean, you'll do yourself an injury  An employer should be allowed to employ anyone they wish without Government interferance for the sake of getting more ethnic minorities into jobs.  ..that's been the whole problem upholder, employers have historically not always employed the best people for the job, relying instead on familiarity and other obtuse factors.  I don't imagination that you as fair minded employer will be troubled by any interference from central government and would happily select a skilled Asian applicant over a less qualified white one, in any event Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
plekhanov   10 #179 Posted September 24, 2008 Well, they'll address the current fuel problem by taking the utilities back into public ownership How are you going to afford this? Particularly if you still have that idiotic policy of scrapping income tax.  The exchequer is hardly overflowing as it is, cutting income by 1/4 to 1/3 whilst simultaneously raising expenditure would make Bush look prudent by comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Wildcat   10 #180 Posted September 24, 2008 Now now newvanman thats not racism thats multiculturalism in all its glory;)  No this is racism:  A Family were driven out of their homes by racist chanting from a Blood and Honour gig.  Sarah Gooding said: "My daughter was petrified. We ran into the house and I burst into tears.  "I told my husband 'I don't feel safe we've got to go'. Our daughters were really really frightened.  Watch the video on the link.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/7632053.stm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...