|
| We do agree on a lot but DEI is the sticking point. I would define DEI as using race and gender as a means to promote hiring based on race and gender. You see DEI as a way to get even with white people for perceived past privileges.
As a society great strides have been made to prevent racism and gender discrimination and DEI is reintroducing it back into society.
DEI absolutely does create hiring quotas due to incentives for meeting DEI goals. As such, DEI definitely creates situations where a DEI hire is chosen over someone more qualified, as what has happened in the air traffic industry as I mentioned.
If we were arguing from opposite sides, as in I prefer white hires over blacks and you prefer black hires over whites for example your assessment about the importance of the race of employees being equal would be valid. In this case though i am arguing from a neutral position of not wanting race (or gender) to be a factor in who gets hired and you are arguing from the point of view that those attributes need to be considered. You are more concerned about a persons race or gender than I am.
As I said before, politics is a different animal than business and every administration picks people on their own side. It’s the nature of politics. The previous administration certainly wasn’t some pinnacle of merit based hiring either. | |
|
Vietnam Cleverly Outsmarts trumps trade war
