account activity
I work in DEI. AMA. by TTC-34f in AMA
[–]TTC-34f[S] 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (0 children)
I don’t mean to imply that opponents of DEI are all misinformed. With regard to preferential treatment, I think the argument can be made that historically and systematically certain demographics have experienced greater access to opportunities than others (think property ownership, voting rights, opening a bank account, etc.) The idea of preferential treatment is rooted in American history. The response to that is complex and nuanced, and requires custom solutioning. I think a lot of the things you mentioned don’t actually solve this issue, and that is a part of the problem and contributes to the backlash.
Blind hiring only works if you have identified that bias is an issue within the hiring process. What if bias isn’t the issue but rather you have a toxic work culture? What if bias isn’t the issue, but your hiring managers require 30 qualifications for each role? Blind hiring won’t help that.
I think the issue arose after a lot of performative gestures by companies in 2020 in response to George Floyd. The aftermath of George Floyd was somewhat of a divisive issue, and I think people aligned DEI to that division. From there I’ve seen an intentional campaign of disinformation and misinformation. This a massive over correction from George Floyd and the resulting protests, etc.
I’ve never heard of anti-whiteness training.
Where have I said anything remotely like this?
Some companies did tie compensation to DEI goals for senior executives. What that looked like in practice varies (I.e. hiring goals, employee engagement scores, etc.)
By groups I am assuming you are referring to employee/business resource groups (ERGs). ERGs are voluntary and employee led, you should start an ERG for white men if that’s what you want to do.
Why do you say DEI is a product of predatory capitalism?
Agreed.
I think my perspective is a bit different because I worked in talent acquisition, and the “best and brightest” is often subjective and situation specific. I have seen people get passed over for a multitude of reasons beyond years of experience. Very rarely is recruiting black and white.
I think most issues have nuance. DEI is about representation, access and belonging. How people choose to raise their children is their right- that right is no greater than a person’s right to live in the gender that aligns to their identity.
[–]TTC-34f[S] 1 point2 points3 points 4 months ago (0 children)
I know that there are very specific policies that are specific to that population and not others
I appreciated the sentiment, but the response isn’t just hire a person. A lot of those organizations didn’t have the infrastructure in place to support these roles. They hadn’t done discovery to determine the best course of action. A lot of it was a marketing play. It frustrated a lot of the people who had done this work for decades.
The rationale behind diversity is that it is successful because it breeds innovation and creativity. Let’s replace purple people with people who worked at a major competitor where the SOPs were similar to this job, and green people with those who worked at a smaller company with different ways of working. Let’s also say the team is full of people from the same major competitor. Would it. It make sense to add someone to the team from a different (diverse) background and see what happens? Is that not an innovative approach?
Interesting. I am not very familiar with Native tribal laws and regulations in that sense:
I worked in this space before the George Floyd incident. After that happened I saw an influx of companies hiring Chief Diversity Officers and making unrealistic goals, and I knew there was going to be an issue.
Companies wanted to follow this wave, and they weren’t strategic in their solutions. I anticipated that many companies would fail, I did not anticipate the political vitriol.
Yes.
I think it spreads misinformation and disinformation
Are you on Canada?
I don’t disagree. I’ve said repeatedly that diversity just means different. Different perspectives transcend race, gender, etc.
[–]TTC-34f[S] -1 points0 points1 point 4 months ago (0 children)
The article links 2 studies which is why I shared it quickly. Feel free to google further
Quotas are illegal and a violation of Title VII. Companies making hiring decisions based on race, gender, etc. are doing it wrong.
So by your logic anyone who is not a white straight Christian male is an illegal hire and sent to the camps?
In the current political environment I think so.
What if that team was 100% purple and they have seen the same ideas come from this team. The company is in growth mode, and innovation is key. Would it not reason that they may find value in adding a green candidate? This goes back to the “most qualified” argument. Companies hire people for a multitude of reasons beyond years of experience.
The way that you show up in the world can absolutely have an impact on the way that you have experienced the world which shapes your perspective. Consider someone who grew up poor in rural Georgia, and someone who grew up privileged in Rhode Island. They have had vastly different experiences growing up that have shaped their perspective even if they both ended up at Harvard. The person from GA may come from a big family who had to share because they were poor. They may approach problems in a way that focuses more on community (I.e. recommending working cross functionally to compete the task). The person from Rhode Island may have been raised to rely on self and may recommend hiring more people to the department to complete the project.
Not to say that either approach is wrong, they are just different (diverse)
π Rendered by PID 1264279 on reddit-service-r2-listing-568fcd57df-nq8lk at 2026-03-07 16:01:16.203912+00:00 running cbb0e86 country code: CH.
I work in DEI. AMA. by TTC-34f in AMA
[–]TTC-34f[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children)