• Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Hiring on merit means only hiring white men because from birth they have an advantage. Unless you ignore all socio-economic issues people need to deal with throughout their whole lives, hiring based on merit only makes no sense, sometimes you have to give a chance to people you wouldn’t naturally give a chance to in order to break centuries old practices. Maybe in a thousand year a black kid will have exactly the same opportunities as a white kid, but it’s not the case now.

    • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Or you could do the reasonable thing and instead of hiring less qualified people, you can sponsor DEI training programs, scholarships, and followup internships. Help them become qualified.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          The Employers either should help the less disadvantaged, or they shouldn’t. Make up your mind.

          If they should, I argue they should do it by sponsoring training opportunities. If they shouldn’t do it, then they shouldn’t do it at all, including by preferentially hiring the disadvantaged.

          I personally think it is not the Employers responsibility, but it is still the right thing to step up when the government fails at its job.

            • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              54 minutes ago

              So they should help, but only in an inefficient, counterproductive way that could also damage their business?

              Because why exactly? Who said training and education has to be outside a company’s jurisdiction?