Here come the quotas..

Will this just affect new hires or will businesses have to lay off men to make room for the quotas? Will minority and female oriented businesses have to hire more men?

Believe it or not - I am in favor of affirmative action. If two people are equally qualified, hire the minority. But we all know that's not the way it works.

Talking to friends and family who work for large corporations, I've heard it said a thousand times "the problem with hiring blacks (and gays) is that you can never fire them." That's a subject no one likes to discuss.
 
Will this just affect new hires or will businesses have to lay off men to make room for the quotas? Will minority and female oriented businesses have to hire more men?

Believe it or not - I am in favor of affirmative action. If two people are equally qualified, hire the minority. But we all know that's not the way it works.

Talking to friends and family who work for large corporations, I've heard it said a thousand times "the problem with hiring blacks (and gays) is that you can never fire them." That's a subject no one likes to discuss.

But for the sake of argument, if two people are equally qualified, why should the policy be to 'hire the minority'? Why not base the decision on the person you think you can work with best? The person you think has the most ambition? The person you think is a better fit for your particular organization? The person who needs the job more or who is the hungriest to do it?

Why must you look at the color of their skin in order to make such decisions?
 
What I find Ironic is that this is so racist but the left does not even see it.
 
do you think companies getting tax payer's money, should be allowed to only have white males working for them or only black males working for them because that is what THEY WANT, EVEN if there are females that are as qualified or even more qualified than the ''boys club of workers'' they have hired?

I think us women pay taxes as well, and if tax payer's money is being used to give companies business and a profit, then they SHOULD have a representation of our qualified citizenry....and an equal opportunity for all citizens to benefit from OUR MONEY.....

soooo, especially, and maybe solely on gvt funded projects using all of us tax payer's money, I think there should be an equal opportunity for qualified employees to benefit.

Then you are for quotas.

Why don't you just come out and admit that? Why doesn't the Obama Administration come out and admit that they are enforcing quotas?

Do I think companies should hire only white males? No, I think they are foolish if they do. However, I do not like the idea that the government requires quotas thus possibly forcing business to hire less qualified individuals to do a job.

Immie

I am not talking about businesses....I am talking about specific businesses that suck off of the GVT tit.....that get all of us tax payer's money....and only where male/female workers are equally qualified....as example, i wouldn't expect businesses supplying security in iraq to have more females working the front line....just to meet some balance....

And my initial point was that businesses will hire less qualified individuals because of the perceived quotas. So, your "equally qualified" comment is mute. No two individuals are "equally qualified" for any job. Yet, perceived quotas force companies to hire people that are not as qualified in order to protect their business.

You say "meet some balance" which says to me that they have to hire some women to work the front line. What if there is one job available and three people in line for the job. One is a career military white man who has experience in the War in Iraq and is extremely qualified for the position. One is a white male with experience working as a security guard at a mall. The third is a female police officer with some experience in law enforcement but absolutely no experience in the desert security details. Okay, the ex-mall cop is told thanks, but we have decided to go with another individual. But, last week the Department of Labor came knocking on the door of the business and wanted to see the EOE paperwork for the company. The company wasn't fined but it was noted that they had no minority staff working security. Now this hiring opportunity comes about and the decision is between the ex-military man with experience in the desert and a female cop with no experience in the theater... HR walks in the door and says, "we are hiring her because if we don't we risk losing our contract with the government". End of story.

Oh, the ex-military man ends up working in the job the ex-mall cop left. :(

Immie
 
Foxfyre - I'm a teacher We need more black male models. It serves the greater good in my opinion. Other professions? I'm on the fence. I do want to see more black men take care of their families. I think that benefit all of us.
 
Will this just affect new hires or will businesses have to lay off men to make room for the quotas? Will minority and female oriented businesses have to hire more men?

Believe it or not - I am in favor of affirmative action. If two people are equally qualified, hire the minority. But we all know that's not the way it works.

Talking to friends and family who work for large corporations, I've heard it said a thousand times "the problem with hiring blacks (and gays) is that you can never fire them." That's a subject no one likes to discuss.

But for the sake of argument, if two people are equally qualified, why should the policy be to 'hire the minority'? Why not base the decision on the person you think you can work with best? The person you think has the most ambition? The person you think is a better fit for your particular organization? The person who needs the job more or who is the hungriest to do it?

Why must you look at the color of their skin in order to make such decisions?

the person who fits your company better is then the ''more qualified'' person....no? So they are both NOT equally qualified for the position fox.
 
Foxfyre - I'm a teacher We need more black male models. It serves the greater good in my opinion. Other professions? I'm on the fence. I do want to see more black men take care of their families. I think that benefit all of us.

Amen to more black men taking care of their families. Amen to marriages so that black children are born into a loving family with role models of a mom and dad who instill in them a sense of being loved, stability, positive discipline, and a spirit of can accomplish good things. There is no worse negative legacy of social meddling than has been the destruction of the black family.

Amen to more intelligent, competent, intelligent, and morally centered black role models so that black children can begin to see themselves as normal, capable, intelligent beings like those black role models and thus members of the human race instead of just a black race. Currently more intelligent, competent, intelligent, and morally centered black role models who see themselves as members of the human race instead of just the black race are scorned, disrespected, and dismissed by those who want to see black people as victims.

You don't create positive black role models by continuing the illusion that black people can't qualify, can't measure up, can't get ahead, and can't earn their place in the world without Whitey's help. You only perpetuate anger, resentment, apathy, and more of the status quo.
 
Then you are for quotas.

Why don't you just come out and admit that? Why doesn't the Obama Administration come out and admit that they are enforcing quotas?

Do I think companies should hire only white males? No, I think they are foolish if they do. However, I do not like the idea that the government requires quotas thus possibly forcing business to hire less qualified individuals to do a job.

Immie

I am not talking about businesses....I am talking about specific businesses that suck off of the GVT tit.....that get all of us tax payer's money....and only where male/female workers are equally qualified....as example, i wouldn't expect businesses supplying security in iraq to have more females working the front line....just to meet some balance....

And my initial point was that businesses will hire less qualified individuals because of the perceived quotas. So, your "equally qualified" comment is mute. No two individuals are "equally qualified" for any job. Yet, perceived quotas force companies to hire people that are not as qualified in order to protect their business.

You say "meet some balance" which says to me that they have to hire some women to work the front line. What if there is one job available and three people in line for the job. One is a career military white man who has experience in the War in Iraq and is extremely qualified for the position. One is a white male with experience working as a security guard at a mall. The third is a female police officer with some experience in law enforcement but absolutely no experience in the desert security details. Okay, the ex-mall cop is told thanks, but we have decided to go with another individual. But, last week the Department of Labor came knocking on the door of the business and wanted to see the EOE paperwork for the company. The company wasn't fined but it was noted that they had no minority staff working security. Now this hiring opportunity comes about and the decision is between the ex-military man with experience in the desert and a female cop with no experience in the theater... HR walks in the door and says, "we are hiring her because if we don't we risk losing our contract with the government". End of story.

Oh, the ex-military man ends up working in the job the ex-mall cop left. :(

Immie

i worked for a corporation that had one black woman out of our 40 executives....i KNOW that more black people were out there to fill these executive positions....

but guess what? this company could still advertise as an equal opportunity employer, because they had 20 warehouse workers that were black.

it does not go by department, but on the WHOLE of the company.

btw, are you speaking about companies that take in government money or are you talking about ones that don't?
 
I am not talking about businesses....I am talking about specific businesses that suck off of the GVT tit.....that get all of us tax payer's money....and only where male/female workers are equally qualified....as example, i wouldn't expect businesses supplying security in iraq to have more females working the front line....just to meet some balance....

And my initial point was that businesses will hire less qualified individuals because of the perceived quotas. So, your "equally qualified" comment is mute. No two individuals are "equally qualified" for any job. Yet, perceived quotas force companies to hire people that are not as qualified in order to protect their business.

You say "meet some balance" which says to me that they have to hire some women to work the front line. What if there is one job available and three people in line for the job. One is a career military white man who has experience in the War in Iraq and is extremely qualified for the position. One is a white male with experience working as a security guard at a mall. The third is a female police officer with some experience in law enforcement but absolutely no experience in the desert security details. Okay, the ex-mall cop is told thanks, but we have decided to go with another individual. But, last week the Department of Labor came knocking on the door of the business and wanted to see the EOE paperwork for the company. The company wasn't fined but it was noted that they had no minority staff working security. Now this hiring opportunity comes about and the decision is between the ex-military man with experience in the desert and a female cop with no experience in the theater... HR walks in the door and says, "we are hiring her because if we don't we risk losing our contract with the government". End of story.

Oh, the ex-military man ends up working in the job the ex-mall cop left. :(

Immie

i worked for a corporation that had one black woman out of our 40 executives....i KNOW that more black people were out there to fill these executive positions....

but guess what? this company could still advertise as an equal opportunity employer, because they had 20 warehouse workers that were black.

it does not go by department, but on the WHOLE of the company.

btw, are you speaking about companies that take in government money or are you talking about ones that don't?

So what? So what if a company is made up entirely of white men? As long as they were the best qualified for the job, then it isn't a problem. Only when they refused to hire a minority or female because they were minority or female does it become a problem.
The issue is that the law is now geared to equality of results, not equality of opportunity. Employers know this so will hire less qualified minorities and women just to avoid EEOC suits.
The whole thing stinks.
 
I am not talking about businesses....I am talking about specific businesses that suck off of the GVT tit.....that get all of us tax payer's money....and only where male/female workers are equally qualified....as example, i wouldn't expect businesses supplying security in iraq to have more females working the front line....just to meet some balance....

And my initial point was that businesses will hire less qualified individuals because of the perceived quotas. So, your "equally qualified" comment is mute. No two individuals are "equally qualified" for any job. Yet, perceived quotas force companies to hire people that are not as qualified in order to protect their business.

You say "meet some balance" which says to me that they have to hire some women to work the front line. What if there is one job available and three people in line for the job. One is a career military white man who has experience in the War in Iraq and is extremely qualified for the position. One is a white male with experience working as a security guard at a mall. The third is a female police officer with some experience in law enforcement but absolutely no experience in the desert security details. Okay, the ex-mall cop is told thanks, but we have decided to go with another individual. But, last week the Department of Labor came knocking on the door of the business and wanted to see the EOE paperwork for the company. The company wasn't fined but it was noted that they had no minority staff working security. Now this hiring opportunity comes about and the decision is between the ex-military man with experience in the desert and a female cop with no experience in the theater... HR walks in the door and says, "we are hiring her because if we don't we risk losing our contract with the government". End of story.

Oh, the ex-military man ends up working in the job the ex-mall cop left. :(

Immie

i worked for a corporation that had one black woman out of our 40 executives....i KNOW that more black people were out there to fill these executive positions....

but guess what? this company could still advertise as an equal opportunity employer, because they had 20 warehouse workers that were black.

it does not go by department, but on the WHOLE of the company.

btw, are you speaking about companies that take in government money or are you talking about ones that don't?

But is it possible that it is not discrimination but other reasons that this is the case. Our church, for instance, is one of the most open, accepting, and inviting places anybody coud ask for, and we do have many members of color going there. But most black people who live in our area don't go there but rather drive far greater distances to attend the 'black' church of their choice.

While basketball, football, and boxing are heavily populated with people of color, the people of color participating in golf, tennis, soccer, swimming are fairly rare. That isn't a matter of discrimination either in either case.

I also have been in the position of interviewing, hiring and firing, a fairly sizable staff. And especailly in the days when Affirmative Action was really being pushed, and despite the fact that we were an agency with a slogan of "Eliminate racism whereever it exists and by any means necessary", trying to find qualified minorities for some of those positions was impossible even actively recruiting and giving preference to minorities.

And sometimes there was a plethora of qualified minorities to hire.

Sometimes it is just the luck of the draw.

Things aren't always what they seem.
 
I am not talking about businesses....I am talking about specific businesses that suck off of the GVT tit.....that get all of us tax payer's money....and only where male/female workers are equally qualified....as example, i wouldn't expect businesses supplying security in iraq to have more females working the front line....just to meet some balance....

And my initial point was that businesses will hire less qualified individuals because of the perceived quotas. So, your "equally qualified" comment is mute. No two individuals are "equally qualified" for any job. Yet, perceived quotas force companies to hire people that are not as qualified in order to protect their business.

You say "meet some balance" which says to me that they have to hire some women to work the front line. What if there is one job available and three people in line for the job. One is a career military white man who has experience in the War in Iraq and is extremely qualified for the position. One is a white male with experience working as a security guard at a mall. The third is a female police officer with some experience in law enforcement but absolutely no experience in the desert security details. Okay, the ex-mall cop is told thanks, but we have decided to go with another individual. But, last week the Department of Labor came knocking on the door of the business and wanted to see the EOE paperwork for the company. The company wasn't fined but it was noted that they had no minority staff working security. Now this hiring opportunity comes about and the decision is between the ex-military man with experience in the desert and a female cop with no experience in the theater... HR walks in the door and says, "we are hiring her because if we don't we risk losing our contract with the government". End of story.

Oh, the ex-military man ends up working in the job the ex-mall cop left. :(

Immie

i worked for a corporation that had one black woman out of our 40 executives....i KNOW that more black people were out there to fill these executive positions....

but guess what? this company could still advertise as an equal opportunity employer, because they had 20 warehouse workers that were black.

it does not go by department, but on the WHOLE of the company.

btw, are you speaking about companies that take in government money or are you talking about ones that don't?

Both really Care.

I do not like the idea of quotas.

I know and understand without quotas many well qualified women and minorities will lose out on jobs and I hate that fact. I do not approve of not hiring well qualified monority individuals for any job. But neither to I approve of not hiring a very well qualified white man simply because there is a qualified white woman who is also seeking the job.

I wish like hell we lived in a perfect world and we could trust people to hire the most qualified individual in every situation, but that simply does not happen.

Quotas are racist solutions to a problem and do absolutely nothing at all to reduce racism or racial tensions. In fact, they only make things worse.

Immie
 
And my initial point was that businesses will hire less qualified individuals because of the perceived quotas. So, your "equally qualified" comment is mute. No two individuals are "equally qualified" for any job. Yet, perceived quotas force companies to hire people that are not as qualified in order to protect their business.

You say "meet some balance" which says to me that they have to hire some women to work the front line. What if there is one job available and three people in line for the job. One is a career military white man who has experience in the War in Iraq and is extremely qualified for the position. One is a white male with experience working as a security guard at a mall. The third is a female police officer with some experience in law enforcement but absolutely no experience in the desert security details. Okay, the ex-mall cop is told thanks, but we have decided to go with another individual. But, last week the Department of Labor came knocking on the door of the business and wanted to see the EOE paperwork for the company. The company wasn't fined but it was noted that they had no minority staff working security. Now this hiring opportunity comes about and the decision is between the ex-military man with experience in the desert and a female cop with no experience in the theater... HR walks in the door and says, "we are hiring her because if we don't we risk losing our contract with the government". End of story.

Oh, the ex-military man ends up working in the job the ex-mall cop left. :(

Immie

i worked for a corporation that had one black woman out of our 40 executives....i KNOW that more black people were out there to fill these executive positions....

but guess what? this company could still advertise as an equal opportunity employer, because they had 20 warehouse workers that were black.

it does not go by department, but on the WHOLE of the company.

btw, are you speaking about companies that take in government money or are you talking about ones that don't?

But is it possible that it is not discrimination but other reasons that this is the case. Our church, for instance, is one of the most open, accepting, and inviting places anybody coud ask for, and we do have many members of color going there. But most black people who live in our area don't go there but rather drive far greater distances to attend the 'black' church of their choice.

While basketball, football, and boxing are heavily populated with people of color, the people of color participating in golf, tennis, soccer, swimming are fairly rare. That isn't a matter of discrimination either in either case.

I also have been in the position of interviewing, hiring and firing, a fairly sizable staff. And especailly in the days when Affirmative Action was really being pushed, and despite the fact that we were an agency with a slogan of "Eliminate racism whereever it exists and by any means necessary", trying to find qualified minorities for some of those positions was impossible even actively recruiting and giving preference to minorities.

And sometimes there was a plethora of qualified minorities to hire.

Sometimes it is just the luck of the draw.

Things aren't always what they seem.

what i am speaking about with immie, is companies that have gvt contracts, where there are plenty of qualified women and minorities with qualified workers ready, willing and able to fill these positions....

I do believe if it is the tax payer's money giving the company their profit and business, then there should be an equal opportunity for ALL citizens of all gender and race, to benefit from it.
 
i worked for a corporation that had one black woman out of our 40 executives....i KNOW that more black people were out there to fill these executive positions....

but guess what? this company could still advertise as an equal opportunity employer, because they had 20 warehouse workers that were black.

it does not go by department, but on the WHOLE of the company.

btw, are you speaking about companies that take in government money or are you talking about ones that don't?

But is it possible that it is not discrimination but other reasons that this is the case. Our church, for instance, is one of the most open, accepting, and inviting places anybody coud ask for, and we do have many members of color going there. But most black people who live in our area don't go there but rather drive far greater distances to attend the 'black' church of their choice.

While basketball, football, and boxing are heavily populated with people of color, the people of color participating in golf, tennis, soccer, swimming are fairly rare. That isn't a matter of discrimination either in either case.

I also have been in the position of interviewing, hiring and firing, a fairly sizable staff. And especailly in the days when Affirmative Action was really being pushed, and despite the fact that we were an agency with a slogan of "Eliminate racism whereever it exists and by any means necessary", trying to find qualified minorities for some of those positions was impossible even actively recruiting and giving preference to minorities.

And sometimes there was a plethora of qualified minorities to hire.

Sometimes it is just the luck of the draw.

Things aren't always what they seem.

what i am speaking about with immie, is companies that have gvt contracts, where there are plenty of qualified women and minorities with qualified workers ready, willing and able to fill these positions....

I do believe if it is the tax payer's money giving the company their profit and business, then there should be an equal opportunity for ALL citizens of all gender and race, to benefit from it.

There in lies your problem.

When you start giving a benefit to the minority simply because he/she is a minority, you unbalance the "equal opportunity".

Immie
 
i worked for a corporation that had one black woman out of our 40 executives....i KNOW that more black people were out there to fill these executive positions....

but guess what? this company could still advertise as an equal opportunity employer, because they had 20 warehouse workers that were black.

it does not go by department, but on the WHOLE of the company.

btw, are you speaking about companies that take in government money or are you talking about ones that don't?

But is it possible that it is not discrimination but other reasons that this is the case. Our church, for instance, is one of the most open, accepting, and inviting places anybody coud ask for, and we do have many members of color going there. But most black people who live in our area don't go there but rather drive far greater distances to attend the 'black' church of their choice.

While basketball, football, and boxing are heavily populated with people of color, the people of color participating in golf, tennis, soccer, swimming are fairly rare. That isn't a matter of discrimination either in either case.

I also have been in the position of interviewing, hiring and firing, a fairly sizable staff. And especailly in the days when Affirmative Action was really being pushed, and despite the fact that we were an agency with a slogan of "Eliminate racism whereever it exists and by any means necessary", trying to find qualified minorities for some of those positions was impossible even actively recruiting and giving preference to minorities.

And sometimes there was a plethora of qualified minorities to hire.

Sometimes it is just the luck of the draw.

Things aren't always what they seem.

what i am speaking about with immie, is companies that have gvt contracts, where there are plenty of qualified women and minorities with qualified workers ready, willing and able to fill these positions....

I do believe if it is the tax payer's money giving the company their profit and business, then there should be an equal opportunity for ALL citizens of all gender and race, to benefit from it.

I agree there should be equal opportunity. I am absolutely on the same page with you there.

But I, as a professional woman, do not think I should get a job ahead of a more qualified professional guy, black, Chinese, or Martian. Nor do I want any of those getting ahead of me when I have the better qualifications and experience.

Having been in the position of hiring and firing, it has been my observation that minorities get the edge these days just because there is prestige and cultural pressures to hire minorities. Some wear their tolerance and acceptance of minorities as a badge of superiority. (Smart minorities do catch on to that in a hurry though and see that for the racism that it is.)

I know a couple of employers who hire women as much as possible because they think women have a better eye for detail and multi task better than guys do. I know at least one guy who goes out of his way to hire qualified black workers because he knows they'll try harder than those who take it more for granted. More than a few around here hire mostly Hispanics because it is mostly Spanish spoken on the job and, unless a white guy is fluent in the language, he feels left out or the foreman has to repeat everything twice just because of him.

So sometimes it all evens out. And again, things aren't always what they seem.
 
But is it possible that it is not discrimination but other reasons that this is the case. Our church, for instance, is one of the most open, accepting, and inviting places anybody coud ask for, and we do have many members of color going there. But most black people who live in our area don't go there but rather drive far greater distances to attend the 'black' church of their choice.

While basketball, football, and boxing are heavily populated with people of color, the people of color participating in golf, tennis, soccer, swimming are fairly rare. That isn't a matter of discrimination either in either case.

I also have been in the position of interviewing, hiring and firing, a fairly sizable staff. And especailly in the days when Affirmative Action was really being pushed, and despite the fact that we were an agency with a slogan of "Eliminate racism whereever it exists and by any means necessary", trying to find qualified minorities for some of those positions was impossible even actively recruiting and giving preference to minorities.

And sometimes there was a plethora of qualified minorities to hire.

Sometimes it is just the luck of the draw.

Things aren't always what they seem.

what i am speaking about with immie, is companies that have gvt contracts, where there are plenty of qualified women and minorities with qualified workers ready, willing and able to fill these positions....

I do believe if it is the tax payer's money giving the company their profit and business, then there should be an equal opportunity for ALL citizens of all gender and race, to benefit from it.

There in lies your problem.

When you start giving a benefit to the minority simply because he/she is a minority, you unbalance the "equal opportunity".

Immie

if a company DOES THAT then they are not hiring the equally qualified person...they are hiring the lesser, and there is no law that forces any company to do such....you are making this up.....it is what you imagine.
 
Good discussion. But back to my point about letting people go. If advantages are given on the front end, why must race be an issue on the back end? Obviously a manager who hires a minority is not prejudiced, so why is the race card even entertained when someone screws up? And it does happen...

Here is a tale of two (former) friends: Black guy and white guy are best buds since high school. They work together; and party together. Random drug testing at work and both get busted. They get sent to drug classes which they attend together. Year later - uh oh. Snagged again. White guy gets fired; black guy keeps his job. Needless to say they are not best buds anymore. 20 year friendship and mutual respect flushed away by some cowardly manager. This kind of shit goes on all the time.
 
i worked for a corporation that had one black woman out of our 40 executives....i KNOW that more black people were out there to fill these executive positions....

but guess what? this company could still advertise as an equal opportunity employer, because they had 20 warehouse workers that were black.

it does not go by department, but on the WHOLE of the company.

btw, are you speaking about companies that take in government money or are you talking about ones that don't?

But is it possible that it is not discrimination but other reasons that this is the case. Our church, for instance, is one of the most open, accepting, and inviting places anybody coud ask for, and we do have many members of color going there. But most black people who live in our area don't go there but rather drive far greater distances to attend the 'black' church of their choice.

While basketball, football, and boxing are heavily populated with people of color, the people of color participating in golf, tennis, soccer, swimming are fairly rare. That isn't a matter of discrimination either in either case.

I also have been in the position of interviewing, hiring and firing, a fairly sizable staff. And especailly in the days when Affirmative Action was really being pushed, and despite the fact that we were an agency with a slogan of "Eliminate racism whereever it exists and by any means necessary", trying to find qualified minorities for some of those positions was impossible even actively recruiting and giving preference to minorities.

And sometimes there was a plethora of qualified minorities to hire.

Sometimes it is just the luck of the draw.

Things aren't always what they seem.

what i am speaking about with immie, is companies that have gvt contracts, where there are plenty of qualified women and minorities with qualified workers ready, willing and able to fill these positions....

I do believe if it is the tax payer's money giving the company their profit and business, then there should be an equal opportunity for ALL citizens of all gender and race, to benefit from it.

You can't provide equal opportunity if you use quotas. It's impossible, because you are stacking the deck and pre-determining who will be hired.
 
But is it possible that it is not discrimination but other reasons that this is the case. Our church, for instance, is one of the most open, accepting, and inviting places anybody coud ask for, and we do have many members of color going there. But most black people who live in our area don't go there but rather drive far greater distances to attend the 'black' church of their choice.

While basketball, football, and boxing are heavily populated with people of color, the people of color participating in golf, tennis, soccer, swimming are fairly rare. That isn't a matter of discrimination either in either case.

I also have been in the position of interviewing, hiring and firing, a fairly sizable staff. And especailly in the days when Affirmative Action was really being pushed, and despite the fact that we were an agency with a slogan of "Eliminate racism whereever it exists and by any means necessary", trying to find qualified minorities for some of those positions was impossible even actively recruiting and giving preference to minorities.

And sometimes there was a plethora of qualified minorities to hire.

Sometimes it is just the luck of the draw.

Things aren't always what they seem.

what i am speaking about with immie, is companies that have gvt contracts, where there are plenty of qualified women and minorities with qualified workers ready, willing and able to fill these positions....

I do believe if it is the tax payer's money giving the company their profit and business, then there should be an equal opportunity for ALL citizens of all gender and race, to benefit from it.

You can't provide equal opportunity if you use quotas. It's impossible, because you are stacking the deck and pre-determining who will be hired.

I don't agree with quotas either allie....but i don't think the door should be slammed on qualified minorities or qualified women, just because the owner taking our tax payer's money doesn't like them.
 
what i am speaking about with immie, is companies that have gvt contracts, where there are plenty of qualified women and minorities with qualified workers ready, willing and able to fill these positions....

I do believe if it is the tax payer's money giving the company their profit and business, then there should be an equal opportunity for ALL citizens of all gender and race, to benefit from it.

You can't provide equal opportunity if you use quotas. It's impossible, because you are stacking the deck and pre-determining who will be hired.

I don't agree with quotas either allie....but i don't think the door should be slammed on qualified minorities or qualified women, just because the owner taking our tax payer's money doesn't like them.

Let me ask, how often does that happen? How often does an employer get a really get qualified black or minority applicant and say, nah we don't hire ******* here?
The answer is never. Managers are in business to make money. Highly qualified applicants do not grow on trees. They are tough to come by. Big companies know this in part because they spend many millions of dollars recruiting and retaining good candidates. Pissing away that investment runs counter to corporate culture.

No, it does not happen. What does happen is that companies get sued by Jesse Jackson et al because they do not meet some statistically bogus standard that somehow "proves" they are racist ipso facto. So to avoid that they will hire less qualified minorities. The inefficiency of having a less qualified person outweighs the cost of EEOC law suits.

Whether companies sell to government or not is irrelevant. Your characterization of them as "taking tax payer money" is totally misguided. It is similar to saying that your internet provider is "taking your money" and therefore owes you something above and beyond the service you contracted for.
 
Atthe rate the economy is going under this administration, it won't matter much... we're headed towards lights out. Fast.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top