Diversity Equity Inclusion

[Marvin the Martian]

Everyone's favorite topic. State hired someone to start a program, they are leaving their post and gave an interview to NPR. Here is a snippet I really would love people's comments on.

One of the most important things we've done since I've been here is bring greater transparency to senior assignments that, until August of last year, you had to be known by someone to be a deputy assistant secretary in this building. And my office led the change for that. Now, while the change is going to benefit women and minorities because we're the least likely ones to have got that tap on the shoulder...​

​

FADEL: Yeah.​

​

ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY: ...I'm delighted to tell you that the first person to benefit was a European American male. And he came up to me, and he was kind of apologetic 'cause he said, I don't know if I'm your demographic, but I want to say thank you. And he said, I saw the advertisement. These positions had never been advertised before - really. You had to know someone. And I said, yeah, you. You are my demographic. Inclusion is for everyone. And what everyone needs to understand is that we are not trying to put a new group at the top of the pyramid. We are trying to level the playing field.​

So for those of us who didn't live in a fraternity, let alone the right one, isn't Diversity, Equity, Inclusion for us too? Those of us not from the power elite, isn't it for us too? Those of us who don't belong to the right club, go to the right church?

In other words, why do so many who rail against the swamp oppose a program decidedly anti-swamp?

There are swamps in corporate America, city hall, the statehouse. Places where who you know is more important than what you know. Why do we not see that as the real problem?

So read that blurb, tell me where what she did is bad.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Everyone's favorite topic. State hired someone to start a program, they are leaving their post and gave an interview to NPR. Here is a snippet I really would love people's comments on.

One of the most important things we've done since I've been here is bring greater transparency to senior assignments that, until August of last year, you had to be known by someone to be a deputy assistant secretary in this building. And my office led the change for that. Now, while the change is going to benefit women and minorities because we're the least likely ones to have got that tap on the shoulder...​

​

FADEL: Yeah.​

​

ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY: ...I'm delighted to tell you that the first person to benefit was a European American male. And he came up to me, and he was kind of apologetic 'cause he said, I don't know if I'm your demographic, but I want to say thank you. And he said, I saw the advertisement. These positions had never been advertised before - really. You had to know someone. And I said, yeah, you. You are my demographic. Inclusion is for everyone. And what everyone needs to understand is that we are not trying to put a new group at the top of the pyramid. We are trying to level the playing field.​

View embedded media

So for those of us who didn't live in a fraternity, let alone the right one, isn't Diversity, Equity, Inclusion for us too? Those of us not from the power elite, isn't it for us too? Those of us who don't belong to the right club, go to the right church?

In other words, why do so many who rail against the swamp oppose a program decidedly anti-swamp?

There are swamps in corporate America, city hall, the statehouse. Places where who you know is more important than what you know. Why do we not see that as the real problem?

So read that blurb, tell me where what she did is bad.

First reaction - is that an exception or the rule?

I don’t really see the DEI movement embracing white males, European, or otherwise, with regularity. Am I blind or realistic?

 

[Marvin the Martian]

First reaction - is that an exception or the rule?

I don’t really see the DEI movement embracing white males, European, or otherwise, with regularity. Am I blind or realistic?

That is a good question isn't it? Would you agree that old boys network isn't DEI even for most Whites

 

[Bowlmania]

Those who rail against DEI initiatives in the workplace, particularly with respect to training, are foolish.

Study after study have demonstrated that organizations that embrace DEI - - and provide associated training - - tend to have higher morale and lower employee turnover. These companies are also much less likely to find themselves defending a costly EEOC action and/or Title VII litigation. There is a very real bottom-line component to this.

 

[snarlcakes]

Everyone's favorite topic. State hired someone to start a program, they are leaving their post and gave an interview to NPR. Here is a snippet I really would love people's comments on.

One of the most important things we've done since I've been here is bring greater transparency to senior assignments that, until August of last year, you had to be known by someone to be a deputy assistant secretary in this building. And my office led the change for that. Now, while the change is going to benefit women and minorities because we're the least likely ones to have got that tap on the shoulder...​

​

FADEL: Yeah.​

​

ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY: ...I'm delighted to tell you that the first person to benefit was a European American male. And he came up to me, and he was kind of apologetic 'cause he said, I don't know if I'm your demographic, but I want to say thank you. And he said, I saw the advertisement. These positions had never been advertised before - really. You had to know someone. And I said, yeah, you. You are my demographic. Inclusion is for everyone. And what everyone needs to understand is that we are not trying to put a new group at the top of the pyramid. We are trying to level the playing field.​

View embedded media

So for those of us who didn't live in a fraternity, let alone the right one, isn't Diversity, Equity, Inclusion for us too? Those of us not from the power elite, isn't it for us too? Those of us who don't belong to the right club, go to the right church?

In other words, why do so many who rail against the swamp oppose a program decidedly anti-swamp?

There are swamps in corporate America, city hall, the statehouse. Places where who you know is more important than what you know. Why do we not see that as the real problem?

So read that blurb, tell me where what she did is bad.

My initial reaction is great. As soon as it starts benefiting white makes, it will, thankfully, go away.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

That is a good question isn't it? Would you agree that old boys network isn't DEI even for most Whites

A “who do ya know” system certainly concentrates opportunity in these same hands longer.

BUT “affirmative action” was never intended to lower standards, and that’s what happened in the long run, and that has had an adverse impact on its acceptance by the general society, and makes it more leery or other fixes like DEI, which appears to be just more demographic-based “winner picking”

 

[Willdog7]

A “who do ya know” system certainly concentrates opportunity in these same hands longer.

BUT “affirmative action” was never intended to lower standards, and that’s what happened in the long run, and that has had an adverse impact on its acceptance by the general society, and makes it more leery or other fixes like DEI, which appears to be just more demographic-based “winner picking”

Im sorry you feel affirmative action lowered standards and that it has an adverse acceptance in general society. AA has helped many a white woman get a equal footing in our society. It has open more doors than what white men has attended. It really sad it takes a law for black people to get a equal footing. When the constitution was made ,the founding fathers did not consider black people since we were 3/5th human. The constitution was for white men. We are still fighting for equality in the year 2023. Yes we have made advancements but we still have a long way to go. I knew with the conservative court AA was going to be denied. Some people believed black people have advance to far, when that happens a lot of people try to stop that advancement. I fear that with AA being stopped in college education,it will move to other areas jobs,and other services.Racism is alive and well,thats why Desantis wants to erase our history so people can and will forget all the dirty things that were done to black people.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Im sorry you feel affirmative action lowered standards and that it has an adverse acceptance in general society. AA has helped many a white woman get an equal footing in our society. It has open more doors than what white men has attended. It really sad it takes a law for black people to get an equal footing. When the constitution was made ,the founding fathers did not consider black people since we were 3/5th human. The constitution was for white men. We are still fighting for equality in the year 2023. Yes we have made advancements but we still have a long way to go. I knew with the conservative court AA was going to be denied. Some people believed black people have advance to far, when that happens a lot of people try to stop that advancement. I fear that with AA being stopped in college education,it will move to other areas jobs,and other services.Racism is alive and well,thats why Desantis wants to erase our history so people can and will forget all the dirty things that were done to black people.

We agree on more than we disagree, but I strongly disagree that affirmative action “has opened more doors than what white men [intended].”

It also took a lot more than one law to get Black people a chance. It took abolitionism, the Civil War, multiple civil rights acts over decades, the entire civil rights movement, and more.

And I am not certain that all affirmative action has been ended by this decision. It appears to only be one kind – making pure, bald, race-only-based decisions. “But “affirmative action“ was never meant to do that Anyway. For lack of a better term, it was supposed to create “trickle down opportunity” to attract equally-qualified and equally-abled and equally-talented minorities, with the idea being that if more qualified minorities applied to get in colleges, and/or tried to seek jobs, neutral decision-making would automatically result in a more diverse education and employment environment.

And in many many places, the schools and workplaces mirror the surrounding diversity opinion the community. Not all, but discriminatory hiring and education became the rule not the exception.

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

Im sorry you feel affirmative action lowered standards and that it has an adverse acceptance in general society. AA has helped many a white woman get an equal footing in our society. It has open more doors than what white men has attended. It really sad it takes a law for black people to get an equal footing. When the constitution was made ,the founding fathers did not consider black people since we were 3/5th human. The constitution was for white men. We are still fighting for equality in the year 2023. Yes we have made advancements but we still have a long way to go. I knew with the conservative court AA was going to be denied. Some people believed black people have advance to far, when that happens a lot of people try to stop that advancement. I fear that with AA being stopped in college education,it will move to other areas jobs,and other services.Racism is alive and well,thats why Desantis wants to erase our history so people can and will forget all the dirty things that were done to black people.

Actually, if you read this post out loud, in a good Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton voice, You can almost feel that you are a little black. Fvck da man!! Let’s burn this crap down. That’ll help our brothers and sisters.
Or, you could just say, I’ll help my fellow continue the journey. It ain’t perfect, it ain’t quick and there will be stumbles while climbing the ladder. But we are actually closer to the top of the climb, than the bottom!

 

[T.M.P.]

Actually, if you read this post out loud, in a good Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton voice, You can almost feel that you are a little black. Fvck da man!! Let’s burn this crap down. That’ll help our brothers and sisters.
Or, you could just say, I’ll help my fellow continue the journey. It ain’t perfect, it ain’t quick and there will be stumbles while climbing the ladder. But we are actually closer to the top of the climb, than the bottom!

dumb

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

dumb

Flaccid

 

[Willdog7]

We agree on more than we disagree, but I strongly disagree that affirmative action “has opened more doors than what white men [intended].”

It also took a lot more than one law to get Black people a chance. It took abolitionism, the Civil War, multiple civil rights acts over decades, the entire civil rights movement, and more.

And I am not certain that all affirmative action has been ended by this decision. It appears to only be one kind – making pure, bald, race-only-based decisions. “But “affirmative action“ was never meant to do that Anyway. For lack of a better term, it was supposed to create “trickle down opportunity” to attract equally-qualified and equally-abled and equally-talented minorities, with the idea being that if more qualified minorities applied to get in colleges, and/or tried to seek jobs, neutral decision-making would automatically result in a more diverse education and employment environment.

And in many many places, the schools and workplaces mirror the surrounding diversity opinion the community. Not all, but discriminatory hiring and education became the rule not the exception.

AA has because it took laws to allow us equal footing, without them things would be the same as the fifties. Separate but not equal.

 

[Lucy01]

AA has because it took laws to allow us equal footing, without them things would be the same as the fifties. Separate but not equal.

Much like your own National anthem, Juneteenth, black entertainment network, black Miss America,🙄

 

[Willdog7]

Much like your own National anthem, Juneteenth, black entertainment network, black Miss America,🙄

You sir are sad, we lived in the US. We should be included in the national anthem and constitution but we need laws to be included in US rights in the country, we lived in. The founding fathers did not include us. We were considered less than human. It took the civil rights of the fifties and sixties just to be able to eat in the same restaurants, go to schools the same as whites, or even vote. What does our own nat anthem, bet, miss black America has to do with anything? We live in America.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

AA has because it took laws to allow us equal footing, without them things would be the same as the fifties. Separate but not equal.

True, but …

Even AA required a starting point where the numbers were reviewed. If (example) you had 10% minority in a population, but only 2% in a workforce, you needed to take “affirmative action” to attract more minority applicants. But once the numbers equalized (or got so close the difference was not a “statistically-significant” indicator of potential discrimination), the AA went away.

Real life example - there were multiple attempts by cities under school-busing orders from federal courts to “stop” busing because the “modern” numbers showed more diverse numbers more closely reflecting societal numbers. Some were approved - some were rejected - some got approved after “tweaks.”

Anti-discrimination laws in employment and higher education have worked - discrimination has now been the exception rather the rule for a long time (at least in employment and education).

Other areas still need work - but this specific court ruling won’t prevent that work.

 

[Lucy01]

You sir are sad, we lived in the US. We should be included in the national anthem and constitution but we need laws to be included in US rights in the country, we lived in. The founding fathers did not include us. We were considered less than human. It took the civil rights of the fifties and sixties just to be able to eat in the same restaurants, go to schools the same as whites, or even vote. What does our own nat anthem, bet, miss black America has to do with anything? We live in America.

You really can’t be this stupid, what I named promote’s segregation. We have had a Black President, we have a Black woman Vice President and Supreme Court Justices.
So go pedal your victim card somewhere else. Why don’t you worry about Black on Black killings?

 

[Willdog7]

You really can’t be this stupid, what I named promote’s segregation. We have had a Black President, we have a Black woman Vice President and Supreme Court Justices.
So go pedal your victim card somewhere else. Why don’t you worry about Black on Black killings?

Typical white answer stupid man. We are not welcome in your world hence the listing of 1 POTUS, 1 vice POTUS 2 justices while the other might as well be white. OUT OF HOW MANY? Like i said you are sad sir.

 

[Willdog7]

True, but …

Even AA required a starting point where the numbers were reviewed. If (example) you had 10% minority in a population, but only 2% in a workforce, you needed to take “affirmative action” to attract more minority applicants. But once the numbers equalized (or got so close the difference was not a “statistically-significant” indicator of potential discrimination), the AA went away.

Real life example - there were multiple attempts by cities under school-busing orders from federal courts to “stop” busing because the “modern” numbers showed more diverse numbers more closely reflecting societal numbers. Some were approved - some were rejected - some got approved after “tweaks.”

Anti-discrimination laws in employment and higher education have worked - discrimination has now been the exception rather the rule for a long time (at least in employment and education).

Other areas still need work - but this specific court ruling won’t prevent that work.

your belief in race neutrality hurts the many not just a privileged few. discrimination still exists in employment and education it will get worse.

 

[Lucy01]

Typical white answer stupid man. We are not welcome in your world hence the listing of 1 POTUS, 1 vice POTUS 2 justices while the other might as well be white. OUT OF HOW MANY? Like i said you are sad sir.

I see you’re having another bad hair day 😆😂🤣

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

your belief in race neutrality hurts the many not just a privileged few. discrimination still exists in employment and education it will get worse.

SOME discrimination still exists - but ... not as much as people are led to believe.

You are surely familiar with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission? It enforces FEDERAL anti-discrimination law (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) in the workplace - it applies to companies with 15 or more employees.

The EEOC exists to investigate/help prosecute employment discrimination claims, and they will COACH a claimant in what to say to file a valid charge. They exist in all 50 states - even and ESPECIALLY states that do not have any state discrimination laws or state discrimination enforcement agencies.

When a person believes they were a victim of discrimination and files a discrimination charge with the EEOC, the EEOC first requires the employer to explain their hiring or discipline or firing or promotion or whatever decision. They have to send in documentation about their workforce/numbers of minorities, their policies and the specific employment decision in the charge. If the EEOC wants to move forward with the case, all they have to decide is whether there is "reasonable cause" to believe "a violation of the [law]" occurred. Any evidence will do.

After that initial investigation - where they interview the claimant and make the employer explain - how often do you think they find "reasonable cause" - ANY evidence - to believe RACE discrimination may have occurred? Go on - guess before before you read below. Just in your own head, silently, every head bowed, every eye closed, so only you will know, (and with the stipulation that anything above 0 is too much discrimination evidence)?




























In 2022, the EEOC found "reasonable cause" to believe RACE discrimination MIGHT have occurred in 1.3% of the race discrimination charges filed with them. Source - EEOC Annual Report - EEOC website.

And even in cases where they DON'T find reasonable cause, they try and get a settlement for the charging party. (And many employers WILL settle to avoid the legal costs.)

Last time it was 3% or more? Ten years ago. 3.1% "reasonable cause findings.

Last time is was as high as 4%? 2005.

During Obama presidency? Started at 3.9 - dropped each year until last 3 years were all 2.1.
Trump presidency? 2.8 - 1.9 - 1.6 - 1.5

Those numbers are NOT findings of ACTUAL discrimination - that's just the numbers where they found SOMETHING to make them say "let's move forward and look some more."

But to hear the media and the "race hustlers" tell it, a black man shoud EXPECT discrimination - because "whiteness is racism" - even though currently 98.7% of the time there is NOTHING to suggest it was a discriminatory issue. Their worst nightmare is a white guy and a black guy having a beer and NOT talking about false race myths.

We MUST stop looking down the street and making adverse assumptions about the people who we see and who we have never met. The FACTS are that we will probably like each other and be a lot alike.

Blow up your TV
Throw away your paper
Go to the country
Build you a home
Plant a little garden
Eat a lot of peaches
Try an' find Jesus on your own

And don't listen to the racists

 

[Lucy01]

At my place of work Black people won’t apply for a good paying job, because we have drug testing!

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

SOME discrimination still exists - but ... not as much as people are led to believe.

You are surely familiar with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission? It enforces FEDERAL anti-discrimination law (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) in the workplace - it applies to companies with 15 or more employees.

The EEOC exists to investigate/help prosecute employment discrimination claims, and they will COACH a claimant in what to say to file a valid charge. They exist in all 50 states - even and ESPECIALLY states that do not have any state discrimination laws or state discrimination enforcement agencies.

When a person believes they were a victim of discrimination and files a discrimination charge with the EEOC, the EEOC first requires the employer to explain their hiring or discipline or firing or promotion or whatever decision. They have to send in documentation about their workforce/numbers of minorities, their policies and the specific employment decision in the charge. If the EEOC wants to move forward with the case, all they have to decide is whether there is "reasonable cause" to believe "a violation of the [law]" occurred. Any evidence will do.

After that initial investigation - where they interview the claimant and make the employer explain - how often do you think they find "reasonable cause" - ANY evidence - to believe RACE discrimination may have occurred? Go on - guess before before you read below. Just in your own head, silently, every head bowed, every eye closed, so only you will know, (and with the stipulation that anything above 0 is too much discrimination evidence)?




























In 2022, the EEOC found "reasonable cause" to believe RACE discrimination MIGHT have occurred in 1.3% of the race discrimination charges filed with them. Source. -

And even in cases where they DON'T find reasonable cause, they try and get a settlement for the charging party. (And many employers WILL settle to avoid the legal costs.)

Last time it was 3% or more? Ten years ago. 3.1% "reasonable cause findings.

Last time is was as high as 4%? 2005.

During Obama presidency? Started at 3.9 - dropped each year until last 3 years were all 2.1.
Trump presidency? 2.8 - 1.9 - 1.6 - 1.5

Those numbers are NOT findings of ACTUAL discrimination - that's just the numbers where they found SOMETHING to make them say "let's move forward and look some more."

But to hear the media and the "race hustlers" tell it, a black man shoud EXPECT discrimination - because "whiteness is racism" - even though currently 98.7% of the time there is NOTHING to suggest it was a discriminatory issue. Their worst nightmare is a white guy and a black guy having a beer and NOT talking about false race myths.

We MUST stop looking down the street and making adverse assumptions about the people who we see and who we have never met. The FACTS are that we will probably like each other and be a lot alike.

Blow up your TV
Throw away your paper
Go to the country
Build you a home
Plant a little garden
Eat a lot of peaches
Try an' find Jesus on your own

And don't listen to the racists

It is very apparent of the work that you put in to explain and site the evidence, in a clear and consistent way. Thank you sir! I am .... The country is sick to death with these Al Sharpton ites, painfully working to make sure we all don't just love each other and achieve greatness.
These lazy slobs have to be shut down. I thank you for your work.

 

[Willdog7]

SOME discrimination still exists - but ... not as much as people are led to believe.

You are surely familiar with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission? It enforces FEDERAL anti-discrimination law (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) in the workplace - it applies to companies with 15 or more employees.

The EEOC exists to investigate/help prosecute employment discrimination claims, and they will COACH a claimant in what to say to file a valid charge. They exist in all 50 states - even and ESPECIALLY states that do not have any state discrimination laws or state discrimination enforcement agencies.

When a person believes they were a victim of discrimination and files a discrimination charge with the EEOC, the EEOC first requires the employer to explain their hiring or discipline or firing or promotion or whatever decision. They have to send in documentation about their workforce/numbers of minorities, their policies and the specific employment decision in the charge. If the EEOC wants to move forward with the case, all they have to decide is whether there is "reasonable cause" to believe "a violation of the [law]" occurred. Any evidence will do.

After that initial investigation - where they interview the claimant and make the employer explain - how often do you think they find "reasonable cause" - ANY evidence - to believe RACE discrimination may have occurred? Go on - guess before before you read below. Just in your own head, silently, every head bowed, every eye closed, so only you will know, (and with the stipulation that anything above 0 is too much discrimination evidence)?




























In 2022, the EEOC found "reasonable cause" to believe RACE discrimination MIGHT have occurred in 1.3% of the race discrimination charges filed with them. Source - EEOC Annual Report - EEOC website.

And even in cases where they DON'T find reasonable cause, they try and get a settlement for the charging party. (And many employers WILL settle to avoid the legal costs.)

Last time it was 3% or more? Ten years ago. 3.1% "reasonable cause findings.

Last time is was as high as 4%? 2005.

During Obama presidency? Started at 3.9 - dropped each year until last 3 years were all 2.1.
Trump presidency? 2.8 - 1.9 - 1.6 - 1.5

Those numbers are NOT findings of ACTUAL discrimination - that's just the numbers where they found SOMETHING to make them say "let's move forward and look some more."

But to hear the media and the "race hustlers" tell it, a black man shoud EXPECT discrimination - because "whiteness is racism" - even though currently 98.7% of the time there is NOTHING to suggest it was a discriminatory issue. Their worst nightmare is a white guy and a black guy having a beer and NOT talking about false race myths.

We MUST stop looking down the street and making adverse assumptions about the people who we see and who we have never met. The FACTS are that we will probably like each other and be a lot alike.

Blow up your TV
Throw away your paper
Go to the country
Build you a home
Plant a little garden
Eat a lot of peaches
Try an' find Jesus on your own

And don't listen to the racists

I'm glad you think there is no discrimination, sorry you are not black. The EEOC just let you sleep good at night.

 

[Willdog7]

I see you’re having another bad hair day 😆😂🤣

Be thankful you sir are white,

 

[ribbont]

I'm glad you think there is no discrimination, sorry you are not black. The EEOC just let you sleep good at night.

Can you tell us a measurable stat or stats, the country can use, to state when discrimination or racism is over? What is the measurable goal?

 

[DANC]

Be thankful you sir are white,

No way I'm getting in this discussion, but don't you ultimately report to a black guy (Sec. of Defense)?

Colin Powell also was black.

Not arguing there is no discrimination, but you work in one of the least discriminatory organizations in the country.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

I'm glad you think there is no discrimination, sorry you are not black. The EEOC just let you sleep good at night.

Not one time have I said discrimination does not exist.
NOT ONE.
To the contrary, the actual words I wrote admitted and agreed there is still discrimination.
Only a fool would say otherwise.
My posts are still up there for every open minded person to read.

I gave you actual facts.
Not one insult.
Not one lie.

I tried to engage you with a truthful and heartfelt discussion.
I showed you respect.
You chose otherwise.

You should ask yourself why you are afraid to civilly discuss of any piece of truth that is different than what you already believe.

If you think the EEOC exists to help white people sleep, I can do nothing to lesson your hatred. You will always see racism everywhere because that is your choice. Its a safety blanket. Hope it helps YOU sleep.

 

[Rockport Zebra]

Teaching young blacks to hate whites is not helpful. They don't see me as 1960's civil rights supporter when I say good morning. They have been taught that I am a white guy of privilege and not to be trusted.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

SOME discrimination still exists - but ... not as much as people are led to believe.

You are surely familiar with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission? It enforces FEDERAL anti-discrimination law (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) in the workplace - it applies to companies with 15 or more employees.

The EEOC exists to investigate/help prosecute employment discrimination claims, and they will COACH a claimant in what to say to file a valid charge. They exist in all 50 states - even and ESPECIALLY states that do not have any state discrimination laws or state discrimination enforcement agencies.

When a person believes they were a victim of discrimination and files a discrimination charge with the EEOC, the EEOC first requires the employer to explain their hiring or discipline or firing or promotion or whatever decision. They have to send in documentation about their workforce/numbers of minorities, their policies and the specific employment decision in the charge. If the EEOC wants to move forward with the case, all they have to decide is whether there is "reasonable cause" to believe "a violation of the [law]" occurred. Any evidence will do.

After that initial investigation - where they interview the claimant and make the employer explain - how often do you think they find "reasonable cause" - ANY evidence - to believe RACE discrimination may have occurred? Go on - guess before before you read below. Just in your own head, silently, every head bowed, every eye closed, so only you will know, (and with the stipulation that anything above 0 is too much discrimination evidence)?




























In 2022, the EEOC found "reasonable cause" to believe RACE discrimination MIGHT have occurred in 1.3% of the race discrimination charges filed with them. Source - EEOC Annual Report - EEOC website.

And even in cases where they DON'T find reasonable cause, they try and get a settlement for the charging party. (And many employers WILL settle to avoid the legal costs.)

Last time it was 3% or more? Ten years ago. 3.1% "reasonable cause findings.

Last time is was as high as 4%? 2005.

During Obama presidency? Started at 3.9 - dropped each year until last 3 years were all 2.1.
Trump presidency? 2.8 - 1.9 - 1.6 - 1.5

Those numbers are NOT findings of ACTUAL discrimination - that's just the numbers where they found SOMETHING to make them say "let's move forward and look some more."

But to hear the media and the "race hustlers" tell it, a black man shoud EXPECT discrimination - because "whiteness is racism" - even though currently 98.7% of the time there is NOTHING to suggest it was a discriminatory issue. Their worst nightmare is a white guy and a black guy having a beer and NOT talking about false race myths.

We MUST stop looking down the street and making adverse assumptions about the people who we see and who we have never met. The FACTS are that we will probably like each other and be a lot alike.

Blow up your TV
Throw away your paper
Go to the country
Build you a home
Plant a little garden
Eat a lot of peaches
Try an' find Jesus on your own

And don't listen to the racists

It's sacrilegious for you to quote Prine while trying to make this shitty point. Shame on you. Shame.

 

[Rockport Zebra]

It's sacrilegious for you to quote Prine while trying to make this shitty point. Shame on you. Shame.

Like I said before, I think I understand you very well.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Like I said before, I think I understand you very well.

I thought you did, too, but I'm not so sure anymore.

 

[Rockport Zebra]

I thought you did, too, but I'm not so sure anymore.

That is because I am getting old, tired and disappointed.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

That is because I am getting old, tired and disappointed.

Getting old? I thought you already were old!

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Everyone's favorite topic. State hired someone to start a program, they are leaving their post and gave an interview to NPR. Here is a snippet I really would love people's comments on.

One of the most important things we've done since I've been here is bring greater transparency to senior assignments that, until August of last year, you had to be known by someone to be a deputy assistant secretary in this building. And my office led the change for that. Now, while the change is going to benefit women and minorities because we're the least likely ones to have got that tap on the shoulder...​

​

FADEL: Yeah.​

​

ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY: ...I'm delighted to tell you that the first person to benefit was a European American male. And he came up to me, and he was kind of apologetic 'cause he said, I don't know if I'm your demographic, but I want to say thank you. And he said, I saw the advertisement. These positions had never been advertised before - really. You had to know someone. And I said, yeah, you. You are my demographic. Inclusion is for everyone. And what everyone needs to understand is that we are not trying to put a new group at the top of the pyramid. We are trying to level the playing field.​

View embedded media

So for those of us who didn't live in a fraternity, let alone the right one, isn't Diversity, Equity, Inclusion for us too? Those of us not from the power elite, isn't it for us too? Those of us who don't belong to the right club, go to the right church?

In other words, why do so many who rail against the swamp oppose a program decidedly anti-swamp?

There are swamps in corporate America, city hall, the statehouse. Places where who you know is more important than what you know. Why do we not see that as the real problem?

So read that blurb, tell me where what she did is bad.

It depends on how one "levels the playing field". Legislation that favors certain minorities over others or majorities (e.g., reverse discrimination) is hardly beneficial. For example, how would you view an African American Harvard graduate compared to a White, Asian or Hispanic? The answer should be unfavorably given the massive disparity in admissions standards.

Court Documents: Racial Preferences Massively Boost Black, Hispanic Applicants

As Supreme Court weighs the fate of affirmative action, new research suggests stark repercussions would follow reversal of Harvard and UNC policies

www.the74million.org

Overall, Harvard’s policies roughly quadrupled the likelihood that an African American applicant would be accepted relative to a white student with similar academic qualifications, while multiplying the likelihood of admissions 2.4 times for Hispanics. For out-of-state applicants to UNC, the force of racial preferences multiplied African Americans from 1.5 percent of admitted students to 15.6 percent, a tenfold increase. Black applicants applying in-state to Chapel Hill gained a smaller advantage from affirmative action, becoming 70 percent likelier to win admission.

Shouldn't minorities want to be treated equally because they achieved success without being provided significant advantages? Those advantages only reinforce stereotypes and create more tension.

It's a different circumstance, but I'll provide another anecdote of a current client. She is the majority owner and CEO of a business in Medical Technology, a heavily dominated male sector, particularly when it comes to engineering background. We had a handful of suitors in for meetings the past couple of months and there are two specific parties that she asked to be removed from consideration.

One seemingly looked down on her and only asked her basic, and often, non business questions, while addressing the important questions to the other members of the Management team (C-suite) which were male. This group was from UT and likely has some culutural differences, which may explain, but certainly doesn't sit well.

The other party had great interaction business leader to business leader but the Partner at the private equity fund that owns the business wouldn't address her with any of his questions (clearly almost avoiding her inclusion).

Her request was simple - she doesn't want or like special treatment as small minority in the field. She simply wants to be treated equally - ask her the same questions, hold her to the same standard, etc. To me, THAT is the best way to encourage and gain equality. We don't need to prioritize or deprioritize anyone. We need to figure out how to ensure that merit wins, achievement wins and performance wins.

 

[Rockport Zebra]

Getting old? I thought you already were old!

Old is one thing, disappointed is far different.

 

[DANC]

Old is one thing, disappointed is far different.

Just ask Hickory's wife.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

It's sacrilegious for you to quote Prine while trying to make this shitty point. Shame on you. Shame.

It is not a shitty point. It is a valid and accurate point, and a very, very, very, very important one. Employment discrimination based on race has been radically reduced in this country over the decades since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Anyone who disputes that needs to have their motives questioned, because the facts show otherwise.

I’m tired of people running around in this country stirring the pot of racial hatred, and acting like the Civil War and the MLK civil rights movement was meaningless. People died so that Title VII could reduce employment discrimination. People died so that young black men and women could get an equal education. And to act like it didn’t happen or act like it didn’t mean anything is morally offensive.

For God sake, we’ve gone from lynchings in the south to a point where even the EEOC rejects 98.7% of discrimination claims because they lack merit. That deserves far more than a “screw you, you ain’t black, you don’t know what you’re talking about“ response.

I’m interested in ending discrimination. The people who are influencing your generation, and influencing guys like willdog, want to keep it alive by any means necessary. They are carpenters with hammers looking for nails.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

It depends on how one "levels the playing field". Legislation that favors certain minorities over others or majorities (e.g., reverse discrimination) is hardly beneficial. For example, how would you view an African American Harvard graduate compared to a White, Asian or Hispanic? The answer should be unfavorably given the massive disparity in admissions standards.

Court Documents: Racial Preferences Massively Boost Black, Hispanic Applicants

As Supreme Court weighs the fate of affirmative action, new research suggests stark repercussions would follow reversal of Harvard and UNC policies

www.the74million.org

Overall, Harvard’s policies roughly quadrupled the likelihood that an African American applicant would be accepted relative to a white student with similar academic qualifications, while multiplying the likelihood of admissions 2.4 times for Hispanics. For out-of-state applicants to UNC, the force of racial preferences multiplied African Americans from 1.5 percent of admitted students to 15.6 percent, a tenfold increase. Black applicants applying in-state to Chapel Hill gained a smaller advantage from affirmative action, becoming 70 percent likelier to win admission.

Shouldn't minorities want to be treated equally because they achieved success without being provided significant advantages? Those advantages only reinforce stereotypes and create more tension.

It's a different circumstance, but I'll provide another anecdote of a current client. She is the majority owner and CEO of a business in Medical Technology, a heavily dominated male sector, particularly when it comes to engineering background. We had a handful of suitors in for meetings the past couple of months and there are two specific parties that she asked to be removed from consideration.

One seemingly looked down on her and only asked her basic, and often, non business questions, while addressing the important questions to the other members of the Management team (C-suite) which were male. This group was from UT and likely has some culutural differences, which may explain, but certainly doesn't sit well.

The other party had great interaction business leader to business leader but the Partner at the private equity fund that owns the business wouldn't address her with any of his questions (clearly almost avoiding her inclusion).

Her request was simple - she doesn't want or like special treatment as small minority in the field. She simply wants to be treated equally - ask her the same questions, hold her to the same standard, etc. To me, THAT is the best way to encourage and gain equality. We don't need to prioritize or deprioritize anyone. We need to figure out how to ensure that merit wins, achievement wins and performance wins.

Athletes at Harvard, and pretty much every school, get in without meeting the minimum criteria. If we agree admission should be a meritocracy, why is that fact not being complained about. Why is hitting a curveball academically meritorious.

I have mentioned legacy, a legacy admission is 6 times more likely to get in:

The records revealed that 70% of Harvard’s donor-related and legacy applicants are white, and being a legacy student makes an applicant roughly six times more likely to be admitted.​

Nonprofit files civil rights complaint challenging legacy admissions at Harvard

Lawyers for Civil Rights, a nonprofit based in Boston, is filing the civil rights complaint on behalf of Black and Latino community groups in New England, alleging that Harvard’s admissions system violates the Civil Rights Act.

www.pbs.org

And now that suit has been filed to block legacy. But not by the Asian groups that filed. Nor have conservative authors spilled a lot of ink decrying it.

If we demand Harvard be totally meritorious, let us demand it. Athletes and legacy have to go. Below are some numbers on race of incoming athletes , Whites dominate:

Freshman Recruited Athletes Less Ethnically Diverse than Previous Years, Survey Reports | News | The Harvard Crimson

One major subset of the Class of 2025 — recruited athletes — is more predominantly white than in previous years, according to the results of The Crimson’s annual freshman survey.

www.thecrimson.com

Let us stop ignoring ways Whites are getting unfair advantages too. We can't only complain when Blacks get a leg up, can we?

 

[IUCrazy2]

At my place of work Black people won’t apply for a good paying job, because we have drug testing!

Stop

 

[Lucy01]

S

Stop

So you want to turn a blind eye to the truth?
That won’t help the problem.