M
Marble
Guest
What do you guys think of employing people based on ethnicity, gender, disability etc?
I generally support the notion that disadvantaged groups should be given a helping hand in to the workplace, but I do think the system (like any other) may be open to a bit too much interpretation by tits and do gooders.
Recently my mum, aged 56, who has had bi-polar disorder for 30 years and for the last 5 years had been involved in developing mental health services where she lives, applied to work for a leading mental health charity on a part time basis to work on a pioneering project nationwide, where only a select few people out of thousands would get the nod.
She was selected for an interview in London, how excited she was, one of only two people in the Northeast attempting to represent the Northeast, but was told a couple of days after the interview, that she wasn't successful, based on the 'ethnic minority issue'.
The thing is, she says there wasn't a question about ethnic minorities, and reached the conclusion that she must have been up against an ethnic minority candidate. The man also said they couldn't split the two candidates (which I find hard to believe), so again it looks like she lost out due to being against an ethnic minority candidate.
I just don't buy the idea that my mum and the other person scored exactly the same in terms of scoring criteria. Either she would have got it, or been up against someone of a higher calibre: Definately not buying this mans idea that he couldn't split her and the next candidate.
Anyone else have any views on this subject?
Are there ways to make it transparent, so people know before they apply the pitfulls of applying for a job like this?
I generally support the notion that disadvantaged groups should be given a helping hand in to the workplace, but I do think the system (like any other) may be open to a bit too much interpretation by tits and do gooders.
Recently my mum, aged 56, who has had bi-polar disorder for 30 years and for the last 5 years had been involved in developing mental health services where she lives, applied to work for a leading mental health charity on a part time basis to work on a pioneering project nationwide, where only a select few people out of thousands would get the nod.
She was selected for an interview in London, how excited she was, one of only two people in the Northeast attempting to represent the Northeast, but was told a couple of days after the interview, that she wasn't successful, based on the 'ethnic minority issue'.
The thing is, she says there wasn't a question about ethnic minorities, and reached the conclusion that she must have been up against an ethnic minority candidate. The man also said they couldn't split the two candidates (which I find hard to believe), so again it looks like she lost out due to being against an ethnic minority candidate.
I just don't buy the idea that my mum and the other person scored exactly the same in terms of scoring criteria. Either she would have got it, or been up against someone of a higher calibre: Definately not buying this mans idea that he couldn't split her and the next candidate.
Anyone else have any views on this subject?
Are there ways to make it transparent, so people know before they apply the pitfulls of applying for a job like this?
Last edited: