February 15, 2007 at 10:07 am
Colin,
I have to say that I think your observations are blatantly discriminatory and they are one of the reasons that woman and minorities have problems in the workplace.
It might seem logical that woman are a risk because they can get pregnant, but that's makes an assumption more often than not they will, and that they cannot somehow continue to work, and that it's not beneficial to society.
Just as a business accepts some amount of theft, fraud, or any other detriment as a part of doing business, you should accept that some portion of the workforce will take leaves. Men can get ill or have family issues to force them to leave the same as women. Small businesses need to accept women as a part of the workforce and treat them fairly. Perhaps not the same as men, but fairly and making decisions about female applicants because they might get pregnant.
Encouraging more minorities or women is a little discriminatory, but it's also an effort to try and balance the scales against those that still see woman and minorities as less desirable employees.
February 15, 2007 at 12:02 pm
Steve,
Colin was speaking plainly as would I. This is not wrong it is an opinion. These things are a part of our respective careers and lives. Remember the columns about interviewing ? The interview process is as much about the potential employee interviewing the potential employer. What ever happened to free choice ? Those who work in environs or careers that they do not like or are demeaning to them have the option to change either their own situation or how they perceive it. Come on, no more entitlements or 'poor me' - take it upon yourself to change.
RegardsRudy KomacsarSenior Database Administrator"Ave Caesar! - Morituri te salutamus."
February 15, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Free choice nice concept but Federal Marshalls escorted the first mass female engineers to work in the 60s and 70s. The law profession before it was not as forceful but it also kept top five in her class and editor of the Stanford law review unemployable for three years. The thing with long memories she made sure Bush cannot overturn laws protecting minorities, Sandra Day O’Connor in her own words the US have the resources to do more but progress have been slow.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
February 15, 2007 at 1:38 pm
It was 'free choice' and moral conviction that made this possible.
Now think for a minute about rights and freedom in relation to women. Next let's take into account time and quantify it.
The amount of progress made in the last 25 years has been tremendous in undoing almost 40,000 years of what we do not want today. Are we not satisfied on the progress to date ???
Think about it ...
RegardsRudy KomacsarSenior Database Administrator"Ave Caesar! - Morituri te salutamus."
February 15, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Rudy,
I agree with free choice and people should pick jobs that suit them. But they have to be able to make the choice. A woman or minority should have the opportunity to move forward in their career and get jobs that are in line with their goals.
It's a hard balance, but it's not fair, nor legal, to discriminate against someone because of their race or gender. I appreciate the honesty, and I'm being honest back. It's just not fair to discriminate.
February 15, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Perhaps I should have stated "Devil's Advocate" .. I'm not sure which part of my comments you object to .. I was merely making putting some observations from the other viewpoint- I belong to the UK Federation of small business, believe me the whole issue of maternity leave, maternity pay, racial discrimination, ageism are real issues to small businesses and some are just about sent to the wall by the legislation.
I do genuinely feel offended when drives are made to force inclusion by exclusion, this discrimates. I'd like to think that in the UK we're perhaps a bit more open, I don't really think about it too much, I work usually within multi-racial environments, have done for years - and yes I work with women too.
We had a thread about women leaving IT , I still feel that the eduction system in the UK is to blame for the lack of women in IT, there's also becoming a bit of a lack of men too.
[font="Comic Sans MS"]The GrumpyOldDBA[/font]
www.grumpyolddba.co.uk
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/grumpyolddba/
February 15, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Inclusion started at gun point going in arithmetic progression while the World economy is moving from geometric progression to exponential.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
February 15, 2007 at 3:46 pm
yeah I didn't mean to come across wrong - sometimes it proves how difficult it's all become, I'm glad I moved to being a contractor where I don't involved within the politics of work ( so much ) . I hate descrimination of any type.
[font="Comic Sans MS"]The GrumpyOldDBA[/font]
www.grumpyolddba.co.uk
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/grumpyolddba/
February 15, 2007 at 9:04 pm
Colin,
I thought you were just observing and not necessarily believing, so I'm not picking on you. But those issues are real problems. In any one company perhaps not, but as a general rule, allowing people to discriminate is wrong.
I know affirmative action or quotas, or forced distributions are also discriminatory, but they are "wrongs" seeking to balance the scales and make things righter than they might otherwise be.
It's a tough thing to even talk about. Bringing any type of argument is kind of a lose-lose situation. But it is an overall problem and I think woman, minorities, and others that are discriminated about more often than not, need some protection.
Not sure about the UK at all, but it is still a problem in the US.
February 15, 2007 at 10:04 pm
I don’t believe that two wrongs somehow produce a right. I also think it’s condescending to believe that women and minorities need protection. That implies that they just can’t make it on their own or compete with men, and I think the evidence is abundant that is not the case.
I can’t say why there are not more women in IT, but I doubt that discrimination it the real problem. More likely, women are just finding jobs in other fields that better fit their needs. I can’t say that I ever really aspired to have a job where I get to install software upgrades at 2:00 am on a Sunday morning or get paged from a sound sleep at 4:00 am to fix a stored procedure after working a 12-hour day. Throw in some cutbacks, outsourcing, and general job insecurity, and it doesn’t sound all that wonderful for anyone.
February 16, 2007 at 2:14 am
I have to be honest I have no basis to claim the UK is better than anywhere else or that discrimination doesn't occur. Before I entered IT I worked in the hotel and restaurant business ( 20 years ), I did rough pubs ( bars ), military bases, 5 * hotels and various restaurants ( Italian, French, Greek ) to mention but a few !! There's always been a very open mix in this industry ( my experience ) and I worked/counted as friends all .. But there are attitudes, and this is an even more tricky subject to raise < grin > but there are religious and ethnic groups that believe women should not work , this is a very tricky subject to post , or that women are second class .. I hope this makes sense ? Now when these people get into positions of power/management then do their "beliefs" interfere with the work ethic?
As I say, this is a tricky one, but I once worked with a "born again" and I discovered in passing conversation that he believed the women's place was in the home and not in the workplace, he was in his early 20's and a sysadmin and was part of the hiring process. How difficult is this then ? I suppose it makes Steve's answer relevent.
[font="Comic Sans MS"]The GrumpyOldDBA[/font]
www.grumpyolddba.co.uk
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/grumpyolddba/
February 16, 2007 at 7:32 am
Interesting replies, but as someone who's a minority, it seems that the most resistance to protection or affirmative action decisions comes from those that aren't discriminated against.
February 16, 2007 at 8:19 am
Perhaps another way to look at it would be to say that the most resistance to affirmative action comes from those who would be discriminated against by affirmative action. Or that the most support for affirmative action comes from those who might benefit at the expense of others. All are very understandable reactions in my view.
February 16, 2007 at 8:53 am
I joined a team of 66 people in a very important project the technical people are busy putting pressure on the business team to cancel 25% of the requirements, I told the business team their needs were simple almost pedestrian. The software was to run in oracle 10g 64bits so I know the rest of the self important clueless members hated me.
The project manager who by the company structure my junior by classification classified me a clerk, I tried to talk to him but he said he did not care; one problem my brain owned his deployment date so I told him at the very least you need two engineers to replace me at most four and I walked, I was called even yesterday for the same job because you have to love both Objects and SQL to implement the business needs. If every public company in the US eliminate one position held by clueless men there will be more than one million positions for qualified women and minorities.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
February 16, 2007 at 9:02 am
Is “affirmative action” (positive discrimination) bad? Is it right to go into an interview with the possibility of being discriminated against because you are not in a minority?
Any form of discrimination is bad and should not be tolerated, no-mater what the intension is behind it. Would this statement be anymore true if I was in a minority?
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 36 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply