Coca Cola : "Be less white"

Status
Not open for further replies.
dLockers said:
The point is that hiring people whether they are pink, white or blue has not happened. It hasn't happened because people have unconscious bias in the hiring process where "how similar are they to me" carries far too much weight. A bit like why all of your friends look like you, carry similar interests to you, and have similar outlooks to you. Whilst this may work in the friends work, it shouldn't at all play into the work world.
Click to expand...

You seem to over reach if you assume what my friends are like.

I’m not arguing that there isn’t unconscious bias, I’m arguing that artificial (and by experience sometimes flat out unrealistic) targets/quotas are not the correct course of action.

When I said the correct course of action is to hire the best regardless, that is inclusive of unconscious bias and I’m supportive of any strategy that seeks to ameliorate that without being flat out discriminatory itself.
 
dLockers said:
Chinese have money, wealth and vast heritage. Similarly Indians have vast heritage are very tightly aligned to British culture in that we colonised them to be our skilled outsource labour. Guess what we colonised Africa to be? We have had a hand in shaping culture and unfortuntaly we are left to tidy up the implication of those decisions.
Click to expand...

Its actually Bangladeshi's below black people in the earnings as well. It is down to culture.
 
Zeeflyboy said:
You seem to over reach if you assume what my friends are like.

I’m not arguing that there isn’t unconscious bias, I’m arguing that artificial (and by experience sometimes flat out unrealistic) targets/quotas are not the correct course of action.

When I said the correct course of action is to hire the best regardless, that is inclusive of unconscious bias.
Click to expand...
So we agree then. And frankly targets are not required if unconscious bias is working. How do you know it is working? Measure against the targets. So it is a bit of a catch22.
 
dLockers said:
Ah Bangladesh. The country we carved off from India. Wonder why they are in mess...
Click to expand...

Basically everything is the white persons fault according to you and there is no personal responsibility.... Unless of course you are talking about poor white people, that all of their own making. This is why it is so hard to take people like you seriously.
 
Zeeflyboy said:
That assumes the targets are remotely realistic, from experience they can be wildly out of touch with reality because it suits a certain goal.
Click to expand...
Baroness Scotland famously helped a consulting project on reducing rape. The consulting firm proposed a 98% reduction as it was realistic. Baron Scotland said that implied 2% rape is acceptable and that the target should be 100%. Who is correct?
 
dLockers said:
It is actively trying to correct a disbalance that was there because of previous discrimination. You weren't voicing up about the previous discrimination, or is now just on your radar because you are the one being "discriminated against"?
Click to expand...

It's pointless to try and balance out the inequalities of the past. I'd prefer we go forward on a level playing field where everyone has equal opportunity. Not arguiing about intersectionality and trying to win the victim olympics over who's more oppressed.

Our main focus now should be ensuring that people aren't actively being discriminated against. Not trying to make people "equal".
 
200sols said:
Basically everything is the white persons fault according to you and there is no personal responsibility.... Unless of course you are talking about poor white people, that all of their own making. This is why it is so hard to take people like you seriously.
Click to expand...
Nope. It is the people who were in position of power and influence. Just so happens "white" is a generalisation which proves correct 99% of the time.
 
silvagti said:
Not everyone is some kind of Social Justice Warrior who feels the need to try and balance out the inequalities of the past. I'd prefer we go forward on a level playing field where everyone has equal opportunity. Not arguiing about intersectionality and trying to win the victim olympics over who's more oppressed.

Our main focus now should be ensuring that people aren't actively being discriminated against. Not trying to make people "equal".
Click to expand...
I bet you would - presumably having never experienced any of these issues and able to describe your family history back generations, with no members of near family affected either.
 
dLockers said:
I bet you would - presumably having never experienced any of these issues and able to describe your family history back generations, with no members of near family affected either.
Click to expand...

So basically you think this is about payback and revenge for the injustices of the past? Hence in your eyes it's OK to discrimate against people based on their skin colour so long as they're white?
 
dLockers said:
I bet you would - presumably having never experienced any of these issues and able to describe your family history back generations, with no members of near family affected either.
Click to expand...

I have yet to see a suggested "remedy" that doesn't just pile new discrimination on top of old.
 
silvagti said:
So basically you think this is about payback and revenge for the injustices of the past? Hence in your eyes it's OK to discrimate against people based on their skin colour so long as they're white?
Click to expand...
It isn't about dragging everyone down to a worse baseline. It is about ensuring people are actively bought up to the next level. Unfortunately this is where the poor disenfranchised white folk are getting left behind.
 
Twinz said:
I have yet to see a suggested "remedy" that doesn't just pile new discrimination on top of old.
Click to expand...
Well thought out unconscious bias training is exceptionally good. Unfortunately not all training is good.
 
dLockers said:
Nope. It is the people who were in position of power and influence. Just so happens "white" is a generalisation which proves correct 99% of the time.
Click to expand...

Is a racist claim less racist if it comes with a higher rate of claimed accuracy?
 
dLockers said:
I bet you would - presumably having never experienced any of these issues and able to describe your family history back generations, with no members of near family affected either.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, mean while my Grandfather fought in the WW2 and probably had PTSD, I'm sure that didn't take a toll on how he treated his immediate family including my Dad, Uncles and Aunties. Most peoples recent history is a pile of **** mate, you're choosing to focus on one aspect.
 
Twinz said:
Is a racist claim less racist if it comes with a higher rate of claimed accuracy?
Click to expand...
Blacks commit more crime than whites. Is that a racist statement? No, because it is true. What are the reasons behind this? That's the interesting bit.
 
Roar87 said:
Ah yes, mean while my Grandfather fought in the WW2 and probably had PTSD, I'm sure that didn't take a toll on how he treated his immediate family including my Dad, Uncles and Aunties. Most peoples recent history is a pile of **** mate, you're choosing to focus on one aspect.
Click to expand...
Your grandfather was likely conscripted to fight for the country he loved and to the benefit of those who loved. Imagine the thousands he fought alongside that didn't give a toss but were paid a pittence, buried in an unmarked grave and forgotten.

Twinz said:
I have seen zero.
Click to expand...
lol. Exactly the problem with half the people on the forum. This "source; me, my personal experience" BS is so tiring to see constantly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom