If you are in the UK you could go to an ombudsman.
Entitlement what can we do about it.
- Thread starter LabR@t
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,899
i could, there has been a lot of dodgy stuff that has happened over the years, it is possible if i make the decision to leave i would do.
Last edited:
Why does someone have to be actively pursuing a politically correct agenda to show awareness and critical thinking?It's fantastic if those with interests in pursuing politically correct agendas ask such questions in a job interview (from the potential employer's point of view) as it comes as a free warning of where things may go if they give that person a job in their company. Of course there will be self flagellating employers who actively embrace disruption from hormonal cycles, time off for childbirth, menopausal mental gymnastics and specious claims of sexual impropriety.
It's hard to ask a potential employee how they view diversity and political correctness as they will almost certainly answer in a supportive manner, when in fact they may be just the person you are looking for, one with scant regard for how many ethnics, women or transgenders are employed, what the bloke working next to them thinks of whatever contentious matter is of the moment, and is more interested in getting on with what they are being paid to do and minding their own damn business.
The ones that ask such questions are a gift to an interviewer, (and only just short of the interviewee carrying a copy of the Socialist Worker and Solidarity under each arm), who is wanting to avoid any potential unrest
Are you so anathema to both?
Still needs to be some common sense to the question.
I wouldn't walk into an children's nursery asking why isn't there any men working there. Knowing very well, men don't apply for those type of jobs even though they can. Same for lack of women in STEM, yet companies are pushing for women in STEM when most women have zero interest in any of those fields. So they dont apply.
Last edited:
Yeah, that does suck, if you're able to do the job then what's the issue, if there is a requirement in some areas for a PhD then perhaps that should be a different stream, it shouldn't block you from progressing.
Like maybe you have engineers (and perhaps research engineers too), researchers, and engineering management.
Maybe the engineers and research engineers come in at level 3 or 4, but the researchers come in at level 5 and the engineering management grades are internal promotions or experienced hires and start at level 6 (arbitrary figures, diff companies do this differently).
You can then still progress in your stream up different levels.
Not in the slightest as we're the ones likely to encounter the people wanting something when looking for a job...
Top tier critical thinking mate!
That is not your critical thinking, it is your own sense of entitlement on show.
You are an employer so feel a need to show this power by dictation.
Critical thinking.... not even sure you know what that is.
Exactly how is encountering someone asking for something when they're applying to people for a job a sense of my entitlement? Oh mighty top tier intellect, please bestow your wisdom.
That's not what was gotten from the information displayed in this thread, go ahead and read again.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,899
indeed......... This is my take on it. Of course I would like there to be a balanced mix of cultures and males and females in the work place (and indeed there is at ours)
BUT in trying to balance out the numbers in the senior positions the answer is not to positively discriminate, it is to go in at the grass roots level and encourage a more diverse range to take interest in the subjects there and take them further.
if 10 people apply for 2 jobs, 8 are white male, one is (insert other race here male) and one woman
statistically with everything else being equal there is a good chance that 2 white men are going to get both posts. That isnt some hidden agenda.
Also generally (not always) mums do tend to take more time off work than dads to bring up a family. This of course should not discount a woman from getting a top job BUT it is foolish to argue against the fact that if you take a pool of 10000 people it wont have an effect on the balance of sexes who reach the top tier of their career. anyone (regardless of man or woman) who takes time out to bring up a family is going to lose some time in work. over 10 years this could over all be a couple of years lost experience. statistically this is currently more likely to be women who do this so it is surely going to affect the AVERAGE career progression of a woman over a man.
unless you are going to argue that 2 people who start a job on the same day, 1 of them takes 9 months off for child leave and then comes back at 75% hrs the other one does not......
after 3 years the one working full time gets promoted due to their experience........ ..... all other things being equal it is going to take at least another year, possibly longer for the person who lost that time to get to the same level of experience of the full time person. again, on average, the above 2 people which one is more likely to be a woman.?
btw i have worked at one of 2 companies since 1998, almost 25 years (a scary thought) during that time ALL of it bar 12 months or so my boss / line manager has been a woman. I am fine with that..... and yet still each year we get encoruaged to put forward women who have excelled in science for the women in science day. I am not a woman but if i were i think i would find the whole thing really patronising.
certainly in the biological sciences there are no shortage of successful women. on the BOM there are fewer for sure, but arguably there are reasons for this which i have hopefully mentioned above.
wow that was quite the essay.. sorry.
Top tier was recognizing it is a two way street my friend but you seem concrete on being a fool so.. have at it.
There are more than just you on here, I said why does it seem the thread is full of employers?
Again it is implied that the thread is dominated by a certain position of power and entitlement from the likes of you.
Notice it yet?
Yet you are quick to judge others "Entitlement"
It seems you are as bad.
Last edited:
I agree.
I would say it is the calling of the basic right to your own life but without humans adding concequences to people, just that it seems the world is deeply entangled in blame and other kinds of rifts.
Humans are the only true enemy to other humans.
Last edited:
Again, my genius amigo, I'll explain in simple terms.
Employers encounter many people looking for jobs because a single position has many applicants.
Employees encounter few employers because they tend to apply for fewer jobs than the number of applicants for those jobs.
Ergo an employer is more likely to encounter those with unrealistic expectations.
Sorry, some of those words were bigger than I'd hoped for, I hope you managed.
Why are you still failing to read what I said?
You are just overemphasizing what your job is and what you do. It is not what I am talking about, now stop being condescending for a moment and put your weak ego away, think again, at this point I am close to giving up with you.
Do you not see the power and entitlement you as a human have over other humans based on arbituary BS to either devalue or value people?
Since this topic is about entitlement, not your job position and what you do.
Last edited:
You asked why this thread was full of employers. I have explained that to you. Do I need to quote your original post for the third time before you get it through your top tier skull?
An employer will see a lot more candidates than someone applying for positions I world have thought.
So that answer is due to the expressed entitlement of employers, it's rich is it not to blame others when you sit on the helm of it yourselves?
It's ok though as racism is only recognised one way.