Entitlement what can we do about it.

It's ok though as racism is only recognised one way.
It's not and I don't stand for it.

I live in the UK though and this is a very very very tiny minority of it exists here.
This part does sort of scare me when moving to Canada though.
 
Last edited:
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 got nothing to do with the employer beibg entitled as many of those in here are arguing against it, as employers.

Top tier.
 
It's got nothing to do with the employer beibg entitled as many of those in here are arguing against it, as employers.

Top tier.

He has this weird thing where he claims to be mega intelligent but then neglects to notice or provide key details.
Yes such as you employers sitting on a pedastal.

When the OP is clearly talking about people below this position.
It's a problem I've come across recently, particularly when recruiting. Looking for a graduate engineer and they're expecting £50k+. They're on a completely different planet.
When you do recruit someone young 9 times out of 10 they're lazy. Also having mummy call in sick for them on a Monday because they've had a tough weekend is all too common.
Using one example to understanding entitlement, when in truth you are all entitled people in varying ways, hypocrisy at it's finest.

Key details you are missing too.


You are not the system but are a part of it and it is stifling people. Everyone blames each other, no self responsibility.


It's ok, as mums and dads we will brainwash our kids, then when things are not as perky, blame them and hurt them from the inside when we reject the delusion we gave them.

Generational issues at it's finest.
 
Last edited:
From the inside by Linkin Park is filling the child with false hope and delusions of grandeur.
There is an opposite too where you abuse or neglect to help them into life with a sure footing.

It's ok though "There is no book"
Responsibility in the adult world is a false illusion too as many who hold it are not the ones at the top.

The people who are capabale of helping these folks waste it on grandiose self affirmation and self centered goals and chalk it to bad rearing, like nothing in life is a part of them forgetting their humanity.

Materialism is a virus.

 
Last edited:
Exactly this...

I've conducted probably 300+ interviews for senior management roles in a FTSE 100 company during my time; and have now done so several times for my own small company.

I would view a candidate asking any kind of potentially challenging or uncomfortable question as a very good thing; and this question in particular would serve them well.

I suppose I can understand people's reservations about being asked that sort of question if you're interviewing for a low level position in a tiny company, but for senior management or regional director level roles, or if you're identifying graduates for potential fast-tracking, then you absolutely want people to show that they're prepared to be critical of current practices, challenge the status quo, and be able to identify opportunities.

For those sorts of roles the absolute last thing you want to be doing is filling the position with a drone who just wants to go along with the flow. Anyone interviewing at that level should be well aware that diverse workforces produce significantly better results by pretty much every metric, and if they're going to be taking on a leadership role that puts them at the helm of 300+ other employees, then these are things that they absolutely should be considering.

I want to hire people who can do their job better than me, so if they're incapable of being critical of the business or it's current operation, or are not able to indicate as such in their interview, then why would I want to hire them?

You think it's appropriate for an absolute career starter to blindly questions? I consider it completely inappropriate.

The answer btw was because we hire fairly. Oh and typically for heavily quantitative roles (but also sales qualities) in a heavily competitive environment requiring long difficult hours.....we tend to get very few if any candidates who are women.

We are a business focused environment, we exist to make money and solve difficult problems. People tend to either love the place....or wash out quickly. For the men and women that are here it's a very rewarding experience to prove themselves and be rewarded for it.
 
You think it's appropriate for an absolute career starter to blindly questions? I consider it completely inappropriate.

The answer btw was because we hire fairly. Oh and typically for heavily quantitative roles (but also sales qualities) in a heavily competitive environment requiring long difficult hours.....we tend to get very few if any candidates who are women.

We are a business focused environment, we exist to make money and solve difficult problems. People tend to either love the place....or wash out quickly. For the men and women that are here it's a very rewarding experience to prove themselves and be rewarded for it.
Inappropriateness is based on values and is subjective, you should keep subjectivity out of it unless it is a business wide rule.
 
Yes such as you employers sitting on a pedastal.

When the OP is clearly talking about people below this position.

Using one example to understanding entitlement, when in truth you are all entitled people in varying ways, hypocrisy at it's finest.

Key details you are missing too.


You are not the system but are a part of it and it is stifling people. Everyone blames each other, no self responsibility.

Quick, back pedal! Your message that I responded to:

Nobody else find it strange that this thread is full of "Employers"?

Nothing in my responses since has anything to do with the stuff you're spouting. It merely explains the mechanics of why, as per your question, there are more employers here.

Top tier.
 
Quick, back pedal! Your message that I responded to:



Nothing in my responses since has anything to do with the stuff you're spouting. It merely explains the mechanics of why, as per your question, there are more employers here.

Top tier.
It's not a back pedal, you just failed to interpret the direction my messages have been going.

You are really surface level wow.
 
It's not a back pedal, you just failed to interpret the direction my messages have been going.

You are really surface level wow.

The answer I have provided is the answer to the question you asked. It was a very obvious question. you're now trying to obfuscate it because you've made yourself look absolutely top tier.
 
The answer I have provided is the answer to the question you asked. It was a very obvious question. you're now trying to obfuscate it because you've made yourself look absolutely top tier.
I type in the same direction my mind thinks, if you can't follow what a inidivual person has been typing in a topic then single out 1 question without interpreting the direction of that individual and trend of thought it is a failure on your half, in other words, highly surface level, you are fast to dismiss based on surface level things. Anything that requires actual brain work like I just mentioned is too much, either incapable or so arrogant you think one way of thinking is the aplomb in intelligence.

Fluid smarts, bridging thoughts and connections to other parts of life and other topics shows a deep intellect if it is simplified enough in a form that can be read by others, but this depends on the ability for the other to also comprehend.
 
Last edited:
I type in the same direction my mind thinks, if you can't follow what a inidivual person has been typing in a topic then single out 1 question without interpreting the direction of that indivisual and trend of thought it is a failure on your half, in other words, highly surface lvel, you are fast to dismiss based on surface level things, anything that requires actual brain work like I just mentioned is too much, either incapable or so arrogant you think one way of thinking is the aplomb in intelligence.

Fluid smarts, bridging thoughts and connections to other parts of life and other topics shows a deep intellect if it is simplified enough in a form that can be read by others, but this depends on the ability for the other to also comprehend.

If you can't ask the right question

"Why aren't people talking about the entitlement of employers?"

You're just not very clever.
 
If you say so.
It's odd you claim I am some egg head then picture yourself as one.

Lol I'm definitely not claiming you're an egg head. Sadly every word that sums up my opinions of your intellect is likely to get me banned. So I'll just leave you with this...

Top tier.
 
Lol I'm definitely not claiming you're an egg head. Sadly every word that sums up my opinions of your intellect is likely to get me banned. So I'll just leave you with this...

Top tier.
Egg head was the term I used in my mind for someone who thinks they are intelligent but is not.
I can't claim I am intelligent, I can claim my abilities though as suggested before.

Intellect and intelligent can be used in varying forms, it is only intelligent when someone else understands it; intelligable.
We cannot always be 100% perfect for intelligeable thoughts to become so they must start somewhere.

I did not start with my question on here did I?

;)



Without the imagination to bridge things, without the introspection of who we are and where we come from, we are doomed to stagnation, not progression.
 
Last edited:
Because the fact they even have a chance to set foot in this building means they have more privilege than 99.99% of the planet. So they can spare me the woe is world attitude
What a bizarrely arrogant point of view.

I wonder if you’re one of those who balk at the temerity of employees wanting things like flexible working conditions, and paid holiday.
 
Last edited:
You think it's appropriate for an absolute career starter to blindly questions? I consider it completely inappropriate.

The answer btw was because we hire fairly. Oh and typically for heavily quantitative roles (but also sales qualities) in a heavily competitive environment requiring long difficult hours.....we tend to get very few if any candidates who are women.
Yes absolutely appropriate, because I wouldn’t want to interview anyone that can’t make an observation and ask a relatively open ended question.

I’m also not arrogant enough to think that just because I’m an industry veteran and have years of experience, a newly or soon to be qualified graduate can’t have valid questions or points of view. Wholly inappropriate?what a disgusting mindset.

Why shouldn’t a potential employee want to know about the sort of environment they’re potentially going to work in? Despite your arrogance it is t a privilege for them to work for you, and an employment contract is a two way thing.

It doesnt sound at all like you hire fairly, it sounds like you hire with a poorly framed and ill-conceived pre-determine bias and can’t think outside the narrowness of the box you’ve built for yourself. Of course you’ve not got a diverse workforce, you don’t understand diversity or benefits that it can bring.
 
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.

The problem is that people want to pat themselves on the back right now. They want something that should take 20 years to take 2. They want "positive" discrimination to rebalance things. A gay friend of mine had no issue with it at all because he saw it as basically a payback. We've had it **** for years so if we need to make it **** for a different group to make my groups life better faster then so be it. Baffling attitude.

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.

This is another thing they are trying to "fix" as well. I am all for both partners being equally responsible for childcare and raising kids...if they want to be. What I am completely against is bending over backwards to accommodate parents and act like someone isn't putting their career on the back burner. Taking a year out or working part time should probably come with some negatives for your career if you are competing with someone else who doesn't have kids and puts more of their time and effort into their job.

This is where all the gender paygap ******** comes into it. Women earn more than men up to I believe around 30 when, surprise, they start having kids and start dropping out of the full time workplace.

Women get paid less on average for men but they certainly don't for the same job. Thats illegal and has been for a long time.

Basically there are things we can do better as a society but god damn we are going about it the wrong way in a lot of areas.
 
Back
Top Bottom