DNC: White men shouldn't apply for tech jobs

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: kaylaluv

So you agree that the DNC should be allowed to just tell white males not even to bother applying?

I don't know that this is what happened. I think a manager said she would personally prefer that this particular email not be shared with white males. How do we know a general classifieds ad didn't run in the paper, and they had already gotten a couple hundred resumes from white guys, and she was just looking for some diversity in resumes?

Well, of course, she wouldn't want it shared with white males! It's illegal!

What part of white males need not apply do you not get? If you are discriminating from the outset against someone for having the wrong skin color, it's illegal.

a reply to: ketsuko

How do you plan on weeding out the terrorists? What about the ones like Stephen Paddock who are already here? The equivalence is there, it's to make you outraged about the discrimination on the other side in order to justify or simply ignore your own discrimination.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ketsuko

I hired her because she was perfectly qualified for the job AND she was a black female.

Sorry, kaylaluv...but you're exhibiting racism.

You've just claimed her skin color was a factor in your choice.

I don't see this as anything other than an employee of the DNC telling workers to engage in a practice called "_____ need not apply."

There's nothing wrong with wanting diversity as long as you hire a qualified candidate. I don't think anyone is disputing that.

But this person actually put "____ need not apply" in writing and someone apparently got upset enough to share it.

Yes it's one person who wrote the message , but exclusionary hiring practices for ANY reason are not good.

This is not acceptable.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Right. I should have hired the white guy. Doh!

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Well sure, I suppose since there are some people here who are terrorists, we ought to just accept all of them then. I see no reason why opening our borders to foreign enemies one and all is a bad idea. Apparently you don't either.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: IAMTAT

Right. I should have hired the white guy. Doh!

You shouldn't be so proud about admitting you hired just to prove you aren't racist by being racist.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ketsuko

I once had two people up for the same job. They were both equally qualified. One was not more qualified than the other. One was a white male and one was a black female. I hired the black female because I wanted more diversity. I didn't hire her just because she was a black female. I hired her because she was perfectly qualified for the job AND she was a black female. Another manager might have picked the guy because he was perfectly qualified and that manager felt more comfortable working with a man. I don't think either of us would be considered discriminatory, as long as our first criteria was the qualifications needed to do the job.

This is what I mean about the right person for the job being subjective.

Unfortunately, from what you said; you broke the law. You made your decision based on gender and on race. It does not matter that you felt both were equally qualified. What matters is that you made your decision based on male vs female and white vs black. That is against the law. I get your ideals but that is against the law as you have stated your hiring practice.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Throes

Oh sorry. I guess I supposed to hire the white guy.

I think both sides are carrying this too far.

What you are supposed to do is be blind to color, race or gender in hiring. If you are not, the discrimination is intentional. I've hired a lot of people and apparently you have also. You can always go beyond equal experience and abilities when needed by using other factors. Confirm references and employment history and the like and you will figure out which one is the best choice. I'd have them both back for a more in depth interview. I'd look for things like how long have they stayed at prior jobs or were they reliable.

I know many employers discriminate in sly, devious ways to avoid the issue. Some even pass over the most qualified to pay them less. It's all wrong is it not?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: IAMTAT

Right. I should have hired the white guy. Doh!

No....but that guy could absolutely sue you for discrimination if he read your post,

a reply to: ketsuko

How many more "terrorist" attacks have been committed by white men compared to Mulsim men on U.S. soil in the past 10 years? If you do the research you might not like what you find, it'll be white men taking the cake. Do you think a travel ban would have helped to stop those terrorist attacks from happening?

a reply to: IAMTAT

And the black female could have sued me if I hired him, because she was just as qualified as he was.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: IAMTAT

And the black female could have sued me if I hired him, because she was just as qualified as he was.

No as long as you did not make your decision based on gender or race. If you made your choice based on something not protected; you are okay. But, if you made your choice on race or gender; then you are guilty of discrimination.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: IAMTAT

And the black female could have sued me if I hired him, because she was just as qualified as he was.

Nope.
You've just told us all that her skin color was one of the reasons you chose her over the other equally qualified candidate.

Why can't you see that as being racist and discriminatory?

a reply to: IAMTAT

So I guess she's racist either way seeing as if she chose the white person you'd be saying she did so because the other candidate was black. It's an un-losable scenario for you. How convenient.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: IAMTAT

So I guess she's racist either way seeing as if she chose the white person you'd be saying she did so because the other candidate was black. It's an un-losable scenario for you. How convenient.

Nope.
If she had stated:
"I hired him because he was perfectly qualified for the job AND he was a white male."

...instead of:

"I hired her because she was perfectly qualified for the job AND she was a black female."

It would still be a racist statement.

a reply to: IAMTAT

I've hired black people, white people, Hispanic people, Asian people.

No, I'm not racist.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Kaylaluv, I hope I did not give the impression I thought you were being racist. Forgive me please if I did. This thread is about the person who sent that email, not you and I know how hard hiring is and the pitfalls involved.

a reply to: IAMTAT

I think you are carrying this a bit to far. I highly doubt kaylaluv is racist and you likely don't believe that either. Kaylaluv sounds like a person who is just trying to do the right thing.

nevermind

wrong thread