That's your assertion that you're trying to label as a fact. Where's the data to support your assertion?
Can't I just use Jesse Jackson's own assertion? According to his speech there are "ZERO" minorities in the "C-suite" of major corporations.
If that's not credible (which of course it isn't), I could spend a few minutes (or seconds) searching for evidence of "number of minorities executives at fortune 500 companies (or executives at similarly large government or non-profit enterprises)" but I'll leave that as a exercise for the reader.
The simple fact that an article pointing out an obvious fact managed to draw out such blatant racism on this thread speaks volumes.
Rule of thumb... if you start a sentence with "I'm not a racist, but..." then you're probably about to say something stupid and racist.
I think I spotted just about every race-based dog whistle so far.
Good job techies!
Ick. Anyone who has to refer to "dog whistles" loses my interest fast. "It's not what you actually said that I disagree with, it's what I infer you meant based on my interpretation of the subtle clues in your text--you can't fool me." Meh.
I'm sorry but the best people for the job can't be all of one race.
Ok, here goes:
If you owned a company and needed to hire 3 sales people and you had 5 people apply for the job. 3 white people with sales experience and 2 African Americans with no sales experience.
Would you be a racist for only hiring the white applicants?
Does he know the high tech industry is highly competitive? If the employee can not perform he is easily fired. If the company can not compete it will be gone in no time. How can a high tech company hire anyone that can not do the job?
If you owned a company and needed to hire 3 sales people and you had 5 people apply for the job. 3 white people with sales experience and 2 African Americans with no sales experience.
Would you be a racist for only hiring the white applicants?
No but if you have 3 white people and 3 black people with similar experience and hire the 3 whites, that is racist.
So it's evident that Jackson has seen an Apple keynote: A bunch of white guys with white guy names preceding and following a bunch of other white guys, all wearing white guy clothing.
Now that I mention it, wow, it really is a boys' club.
If you owned a company and needed to hire 3 sales people and you had 5 people apply for the job. 3 white people with sales experience and 2 African Americans with no sales experience.
Would you be a racist for only hiring the white applicants?
Frankly, I don't care if it would be considered "racist." But I could also see plenty of reasons for hiring one or both of the minority candidates. First off, experience is just one part of an applicant's resume. If the experience white guys are mumbling boobs and the minorities are well-spoken, enthusiastic go-getters, I know who I'd choose. And depending on the location of my store (for a retail job) or the nature of my customers, I might even give preferen.... uh nevermind. I mean I might see the value in having a diverse sales force to better understand the diverse nature of my clients. That might not work for a paper company, but it would certainly be relevant for a clothing gig.
Because this involves Jesse Jackson and large billion dollar companies it made big news. But what you don't see are the much smaller cases of enforced diversity training courses all over the country. One such example involved a friend of mine who is a teacher. She has been star teacher numerous times and has won many teaching awards. She does not have a racist bone in her body. Her school district paid over $300,000 for a 3 day seminar to a groups of scammers from a company called Pacific Educational Group that immediately began to verbally assault all the white teachers and told them whether they think they are racist or not they are racist. It was a complete scam and set back race relations in the district and accomplished absolutely nothing. The teachers were absolutely devastated and demoralized after 3 days of forced verbal assaults.
This is the guy that became extremely wealthy by charging poor school districts hundreds of thousands of dollars to give a seminar for a few days and explain why all white people are racists and it is impossible for blacks to ever be racist. His name is Glen Singleton. If you ever hear that your school district are considering bringing his company for a seminar do everything you can to make sure that does not happen.
Is it? What if two "white" applicants were hired instead of three? What if one "white" applicant is hired?
Arbitrary quotas based on race are racist. The end.
1 and 2 person hiring is different. I'm not arguing for quotas but if you're white and you hire three white people over the other qualified candidates who happen to be a minority, all else being equal, because you feel more comfortable, then that's racist.
Putting aside the aroma of a reputed Jessie Jackson shakedown, I mostly agree with both of you.
But, I prefer direct affirmative action -- rather than getting the governments/politicians involved ...
For example, couldn't these companies better address the problems of the middd class and poor by creating jobs in depressed areas -- Detroit, for example.
NY, AZ, TX and others give tax incentives to entice job creation in their states -- Companies that take advantage of these incentives tend to create support jobs (construction, services, etc.) in addition to the direct employment. The fanout benefits the entire community -- not to mention the satisfaction of earning your own way!
I also would rather see investment in direct affirmative action as opposed to token board members.
And I would posit that 'token' is a bad choice of words (or was it?) I think 'Board members who can best represent our global community of owners, employees and customers'
Job creation in the knowledge industry is less about creating 'jobs' in Detroit, than to 'educate for the new economy' in Detroit. That's where the problem lies. Education is based on property values and people with no excess capital for community reinvestment (due to 100's of years of not being allowed to earn/retain wealth, ending... well, it may not have ended just yet [see 'The New Jim Crowe' book];-( ).
It takes a board member block of votes to support a CxO to make a decision to invest in a community. But it also takes a set of middle and director level managers who are capable and comfortable to fight for success of the program, as there will be risks that need to be addressed in execution.
I chose the word token * with care, considered the ramifications -- then decided to go with it.
* done for the sake of appearances or as a symbolic gesture
To me, action mostly trumps appearances.
I do agree that "creating jobs in Detroit" is not as important as education, and other deficiencies. However, it is a beginning, and more readily attainable than addressing the socio-poitical issues which comes with attendant involvement of governments and politicians.
When I worked for IBM, they put a cable manufacturing plant in a rundown neighborhood of Bedford-Styvasant:
IBM Brooklyn plant
A bridge to opportunities: The IBM Brooklyn plant
Brooklyn, N.Y., has been renowned for its churches, Coney Island beach and boardwalk, loveable baseball bums ( the Dodgers), historic Navy yard and world-famous suspension bridge.
In IBM, Brooklyn has also been known for a pioneering company effort to create and provide manufacturing jobs in an economically depressed inner-city community of nearly half a million people (nearly the size of Minneapolis), most of whom were minorities.
On April 17, 1968, IBM announced that it would open a manufacturing facility in a leased building at Gates and Nostrand Avenues in the borough's Bedford-Stuyvesant area. IBM Chairman Thomas J. Watson, Jr., said at the time:
Establishing a new manufacturing activity is always a milestone for our company. This is all the more meaningful in the case of Bedford-Stuyvesant, where the requirement for new job opportunities is so acute. We will do our best to be responsive to the needs of the area and look forward to being part of the community.
Watson had decided that IBM needed to go beyond the government aid programs of the 1960s that had made possible corporate sponsorship of such projects as Job Corps Centers. He selected "Bed-Sty" because it had not received much attention from private business and because, two years earlier, the late Senator Robert F. Kennedy had asked Watson to serve on the Board of Directors of the newly-formed Bedford-Stuyvesant Development and Service Corporation -- a combined public/private effort to rehabilitate the area.
The new plant -- staffed initially by about 17 people beginning in July 1968 and by more than 300 a year later -- began business by manufacturing computer cables for use in IBM's entire standard computer line. Ernest K. Friedli, a 21-year IBM veteran, was named as the plant's first general manager.
Brooklyn plant management team in
May 1968 Ernest K. Friedli (seated), general manager of IBM's Brooklyn, N.Y., plant, with members of the facility's management team in May 1968. Shown from left are Henry Jackson, manager of personnel; John W. Lawson, production control manager; Edgar A. Fitt, information manager; Alfred J. Iannone, manager, plans and operations; Matthew Whithead, II, legal counsel; Eugene E. Douglas, manager of manufacturing operations; Dean M. Kintner, staff assistant; and Eric J. Flood, controller.
Cable production was started on July 8, 1968 in a small area on the second floor. Brooklyn's first shipment of external cables went to IBM's huge Poughkeepsie plant, in upstate New York. Four months later, the Brooklyn site took on a second product mission: the manufacture of power supplies for the IBM 029 card punch and the IBM 059 card verifier. Power supply units provided the exact amounts of electrical power necessary to operate these machines, and Brooklyn began shipping its first completed power supply units to IBM's Kingston, N.Y., factory in January 1969.
...
In foreground, John R. Opel, IBM president and chief executive officer, with Henry Bing, Jr., left, general manager, and Herbert Bruce, right, sub-products manager, first shift, in 1981.
In 1993, the Brooklyn plant became an independent, minority-owned business when IBM transferred its ownership to Advanced Technological Solutions Inc., a new business consisting mainly of former managers and employees of the facility. ATSI continued to perform the same services for IBM as before, along with additional work for non-IBM customers.
If we want racism to die we need to stop pulling the race card and/or "investigating racial diversity" in corporate America. I HIGHLY doubt when high level interviews are conducted there are conversations that go something like this, "I think they're a good candidate but you know I just can't get over the fact that he/she's (insert your favorite color here)."
I'm completely against racism and the exclusion of women. But the population is still made up of a white majority. And a large part of the women in the US still haven't even entered the workforce. So it does seem a little harsh for Mr. Jackson to say that the only reason for most senior officials in US companies being white and male, is racism and discrimination.
Racism/discrimination is a cumulative effect. What happened to people of color 20-40 years ago (and their parents and grandparents before them) basically eliminated them as potential candidates [didn't go to the right school, haven't worked up the corporate ladder, not economically self sufficient because no generational wealth accumulation]. Jesse is saying effectively that the bastion of white maledom needs affirmative action.
And... check your stats. US Bureau of Labor statistics says 'a large part' of women over 17 are working or looking for work.
and those women that do are actively discriminated against, so much so that it took an act of congress (and 2 tries at that, with corporate lobbyist's screaming at the top of their lungs about the lost profits to shareholders [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_of_2009]) to force pay equity.
As for 'White [Male] Majority' I think Jesse's point is that we're long past 'majority = winner and winner take all [board spots]' and our executive leadership should reflect the constituencies of the consumer, the stockholder and the employee. His message may be grating to some, but it's that's what hard truth is to those who have to give up power for global justice.
So no movement since this was last raised as an issue? Disappointing. Even a simply statement on the company's equality and diversity policy would help here.
If we want racism to die we need to stop pulling the race card and/or "investigating racial diversity" in corporate America. I HIGHLY doubt when high level interviews are conducted there are conversations that go something like this, "I think they're a good candidate but you know I just can't get over the fact that he/she's (insert your favorite color here)."
Racism is more refined that that.
"He didn't go to Harvard.... like this guy"
"His net worth makes us queasy he can't dedicate the time to the position"
"She has a 14 yo child"
You don't have to say it... you just have to have enough people to 'think it'.
Well I think we should have a WET awards and TV station. I mean it's only fair right?
The BET is the perfect example of "hey we don't practice what we preach."
WET would fail. What programming could you put on that ABC, CBS and NBC don't already cover? The minute you put some fool from Amren on your advertisers would flee. Really only small groups/culture need specific programming that isn't readily available on larger channels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1
This is another case of someone preaching that black people should be included because they are black, regardless how smart they are.
Satya Nadella is Indian and he's CEO of Microsoft.
As one poster said before. The important part is leveling the playing field for our K-12 academic institutions. The key ingredient of poverty often is a single parent household, local schools in disrepair and drug usage.
If we eradicate the chasm between these schools and provide a safe environment for all kids we will see much better results in our school. The War on Drugs has failed (unless you consider it a victory that we incarcerate a ridiculous amount of people)
I'm not concerned with now as much as I'm concerned with kids entertaining the education processes without the necessary tools to afford them the option of chasing STEM degrees.
Comments
That's your assertion that you're trying to label as a fact. Where's the data to support your assertion?
Can't I just use Jesse Jackson's own assertion? According to his speech there are "ZERO" minorities in the "C-suite" of major corporations.
If that's not credible (which of course it isn't), I could spend a few minutes (or seconds) searching for evidence of "number of minorities executives at fortune 500 companies (or executives at similarly large government or non-profit enterprises)" but I'll leave that as a exercise for the reader.
The simple fact that an article pointing out an obvious fact managed to draw out such blatant racism on this thread speaks volumes.
Rule of thumb... if you start a sentence with "I'm not a racist, but..." then you're probably about to say something stupid and racist.
I think I spotted just about every race-based dog whistle so far.
Good job techies!
Ick. Anyone who has to refer to "dog whistles" loses my interest fast. "It's not what you actually said that I disagree with, it's what I infer you meant based on my interpretation of the subtle clues in your text--you can't fool me." Meh.
I'm sorry but the best people for the job can't be all of one race.
Ok, here goes:
If you owned a company and needed to hire 3 sales people and you had 5 people apply for the job. 3 white people with sales experience and 2 African Americans with no sales experience.
Would you be a racist for only hiring the white applicants?
Does he know the high tech industry is highly competitive? If the employee can not perform he is easily fired. If the company can not compete it will be gone in no time. How can a high tech company hire anyone that can not do the job?
No but if you have 3 white people and 3 black people with similar experience and hire the 3 whites, that is racist.
No but if you have 3 white people and 3 black people with similar experience and hire the 3 whites, that is racist.
Correct.
Is it? What if two "white" applicants were hired instead of three? What if one "white" applicant is hired?
Arbitrary quotas based on race are racist. The end.
Now that I mention it, wow, it really is a boys' club.
Ok, here goes:
If you owned a company and needed to hire 3 sales people and you had 5 people apply for the job. 3 white people with sales experience and 2 African Americans with no sales experience.
Would you be a racist for only hiring the white applicants?
Frankly, I don't care if it would be considered "racist." But I could also see plenty of reasons for hiring one or both of the minority candidates. First off, experience is just one part of an applicant's resume. If the experience white guys are mumbling boobs and the minorities are well-spoken, enthusiastic go-getters, I know who I'd choose. And depending on the location of my store (for a retail job) or the nature of my customers, I might even give preferen.... uh nevermind. I mean I might see the value in having a diverse sales force to better understand the diverse nature of my clients. That might not work for a paper company, but it would certainly be relevant for a clothing gig.
Because this involves Jesse Jackson and large billion dollar companies it made big news. But what you don't see are the much smaller cases of enforced diversity training courses all over the country. One such example involved a friend of mine who is a teacher. She has been star teacher numerous times and has won many teaching awards. She does not have a racist bone in her body. Her school district paid over $300,000 for a 3 day seminar to a groups of scammers from a company called Pacific Educational Group that immediately began to verbally assault all the white teachers and told them whether they think they are racist or not they are racist. It was a complete scam and set back race relations in the district and accomplished absolutely nothing. The teachers were absolutely devastated and demoralized after 3 days of forced verbal assaults.
This is the guy that became extremely wealthy by charging poor school districts hundreds of thousands of dollars to give a seminar for a few days and explain why all white people are racists and it is impossible for blacks to ever be racist. His name is Glen Singleton. If you ever hear that your school district are considering bringing his company for a seminar do everything you can to make sure that does not happen.
http://www.openmarket.org/2007/12/12/glenn-singletons-racism-and-the-arlington-public-schools/
First: get them to complete high school at the same rate
Careful. You’re ableist for saying that.
Seems they want the cabbage before the corn. Or… you know.
1 and 2 person hiring is different. I'm not arguing for quotas but if you're white and you hire three white people over the other qualified candidates who happen to be a minority, all else being equal, because you feel more comfortable, then that's racist.
I chose the word token * with care, considered the ramifications -- then decided to go with it.
* done for the sake of appearances or as a symbolic gesture
To me, action mostly trumps appearances.
I do agree that "creating jobs in Detroit" is not as important as education, and other deficiencies. However, it is a beginning, and more readily attainable than addressing the socio-poitical issues which comes with attendant involvement of governments and politicians.
When I worked for IBM, they put a cable manufacturing plant in a rundown neighborhood of Bedford-Styvasant:
http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/brooklyn/brooklyn_1.html
I skipped over part of the article, but if you read through it, you will see the progress that this type of endeavor can make.
Unfortunately, the story becomes one political/governments meddling ... You can surf and form your own opinions.
I'm completely against racism and the exclusion of women. But the population is still made up of a white majority. And a large part of the women in the US still haven't even entered the workforce. So it does seem a little harsh for Mr. Jackson to say that the only reason for most senior officials in US companies being white and male, is racism and discrimination.
Racism/discrimination is a cumulative effect. What happened to people of color 20-40 years ago (and their parents and grandparents before them) basically eliminated them as potential candidates [didn't go to the right school, haven't worked up the corporate ladder, not economically self sufficient because no generational wealth accumulation]. Jesse is saying effectively that the bastion of white maledom needs affirmative action.
And... check your stats. US Bureau of Labor statistics says 'a large part' of women over 17 are working or looking for work.
http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2011/ted_20111223.htm
and those women that do are actively discriminated against, so much so that it took an act of congress (and 2 tries at that, with corporate lobbyist's screaming at the top of their lungs about the lost profits to shareholders [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_of_2009]) to force pay equity.
As for 'White [Male] Majority' I think Jesse's point is that we're long past 'majority = winner and winner take all [board spots]' and our executive leadership should reflect the constituencies of the consumer, the stockholder and the employee. His message may be grating to some, but it's that's what hard truth is to those who have to give up power for global justice.
And... check your stats. US Bureau of Labor statistics says 'a large part' of women over 17 are working or looking for work.
Wouldn’t that be more due to the fact that ~30% of the country is out of work than anything else?
So no movement since this was last raised as an issue? Disappointing. Even a simply statement on the company's equality and diversity policy would help here.
If we want racism to die we need to stop pulling the race card and/or "investigating racial diversity" in corporate America. I HIGHLY doubt when high level interviews are conducted there are conversations that go something like this, "I think they're a good candidate but you know I just can't get over the fact that he/she's (insert your favorite color here)."
Racism is more refined that that.
"He didn't go to Harvard.... like this guy"
"His net worth makes us queasy he can't dedicate the time to the position"
"She has a 14 yo child"
You don't have to say it... you just have to have enough people to 'think it'.
Well I think we should have a WET awards and TV station. I mean it's only fair right?
The BET is the perfect example of "hey we don't practice what we preach."
WET would fail. What programming could you put on that ABC, CBS and NBC don't already cover? The minute you put some fool from Amren on your advertisers would flee. Really only small groups/culture need specific programming that isn't readily available on larger channels.
This is another case of someone preaching that black people should be included because they are black, regardless how smart they are.
Satya Nadella is Indian and he's CEO of Microsoft.
As one poster said before. The important part is leveling the playing field for our K-12 academic institutions. The key ingredient of poverty often is a single parent household, local schools in disrepair and drug usage.
If we eradicate the chasm between these schools and provide a safe environment for all kids we will see much better results in our school. The War on Drugs has failed (unless you consider it a victory that we incarcerate a ridiculous amount of people)
I'm not concerned with now as much as I'm concerned with kids entertaining the education processes without the necessary tools to afford them the option of chasing STEM degrees.