Erasure
Erasure
You're viewing a single thread.
268 comments
-
Even if you're against DEI in hiring (which I am), taking down pages of women in STEM is ridiculous. We want to encourage people to know what's possible and we want them to push for it based on merit
-
equity and inclusion in hiring is about confronting biases in the hiring process, it's good for meritocracy
-
DEI is an attempt at merit-based hiring. The only difference is what the definition of merit is. The definition that is based on past achievements is biased towards those who have previously had better opportunities, not necessarily better skills. DEI takes a look at the potential of someone in the context of how well they've done with respect to what has been available to them.
Someone who has a GED instead of graduating high school on time might have had opportunities closed to them because they had a reason for dropping out of high school (e.x. had to help family by getting a job), so it wouldn't be equitable to judge them harshly for not having as strong of a resume as someone who had a "conventional" experience and was given more opportunities fresh out of highschool because they could afford to take an unpaid/low pay internship, instead of focusing on taking care of a family.
Nothing about either situation really can tell you about an applicants potential in the field or their work ethic or anything. But 9 times out of 10 the one who was fortunate enough to finish highschool on time will be ahead in the selection process for no reason other than they didn't have life get in the way of their career.
DEI won't be able to magically tell you which candidate is better, but it can allow employers to level the playing field and use different metrics to measure merit that might be less biased against people who have had nontraditional lives through no fault of their own.
-
I just wanna say I appreciate that you went into such detail to explain this. As somebody who's honestly a little dumb, this has always been something I struggled to understand but could tell I was missing something. It's nice to finally hear it in a way that makes sense to me.
-
-
Why are you against Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion in the hiring process?
-
The main reason I'm against "Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion in the hiring process" is it makes the average minority at a company worse compared to their white male peers, which is a horrible situation that breeds further racism.
My girlfriend is a visible minority in a STEM field. If people look at her and think "DEI hire", that's harmful, not helpful.
-
“Racist people use DEI as an excuse to be racist therefore DEI is bad.”
-
They could look at her and potentially think "DEI hire," or they could not think about her at all because she wasn't hired due to some factor relating to her racial background. What bass-ackwards logic.
-
or they could not think about her at all because she wasn't hired
Lmao thanks for implying my girlfriend wouldn't get a job without being a minority you racist
-
That's not how I read it at all. You're so close to figuring out why POCs need DEI. You GF can't get a job without DEI because of racism. Regardless of her skill or experience. DEI forces employers to look beyond skin colour.
-
This guy is desperate for a troll
-
Are you aware of, like, all of American history?
-
Your girlfriend works with racists. That's not the fault of DEI.
-
How is it racist if the bar is lower for minorities? They will be able to get the job at lower performance
-
That's literally not how DEI works. Inform yourself.
-
?? I've worked in hiring and seen a meeting where managers were informed of a new goal to make teams "50% diverse". You also literally ignored the content of my other comment that included a source.
Inform yourself
Unless you can articulate extremely well how DEI works, I'm going to (likely correctly) assume you're not informed
-
When faced with two evenly matched employees, choose the one that increases diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace.
The candidates are equally qualified... If a straight, white, male candidate is more qualified than a black lesbian woman, then nothing is stopping them from going with the white dude. DEI is only meant to come into play when the candidates are equal in all other aspects.
If you've experienced it done wrong, that's a bummer... Doesn't mean we should do away with it completely. Worst case, we end up erring on the side of having more diversity. Oh no. How awful.
The current and historical framework has meant that straight, white, dudes are the default. So if we're "accidentally" going the other way sometimes, then I can live with that. I say this as a straight, white, male.
-
-
-
DEI was implemented because without it, equally qualified minorities don't get hired, there's been endless studies on this. Stop falling for racist propaganda.
-
-
-
-
-
So you think everyone should act in accordance with how while male peers think or act in a way that makes them not think "DEI Hire".
I have news for you: those people will find excuses to exclude POC regardless of DEI
-
Makes them worse? What the fuck does that even mean?
-
I never said it "makes them worse", read it again
-
-
-
-
Do you actually know what "DEI in hiring" actually entails?
-
It varies by company, but it can be up to "an acceptable balance between minority hiring and expected performance”[0]
[0] https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-full-story-of-the-faas-hiring
-
Really reaching there, aren't we?
-
-
-
268 comments