This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Mapletree Croydon 08 Dec 20 12.43pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Spiderman
Serious questions: Would the best candidate get the job or would it be decided on colour? Why are they in demand, to satisfy quotas? It is established that diverse organisations overall perform better and it is therefore financially and organisationally useful to try to get the balance correct. To encourage diversity some organisations may place a small additional weighting on a diversity candidate. But likely only in roles where diversity is relatively low compared to the benefit. So where someone is managing a highly diverse group or where currently there is little diversity. This is unlikely to cut in until senior levels. It is incredibly hard to hire Executive Directors from diversity backgrounds, I have had personal experience both here and in the US. I aim to ensure good diversity at one level below Executive to try to grow our own, given the scarcity. Remember that Diversity covers many areas, not just ethnicity or race. It is the case in London that you would aim for as near as possible 50% women at senior levels and ideally 34% ethnic diversity, 5% disabled and 4.5% LGBTQA. Plus a good age spread. This is almost never possible. I won't hire unqualified candidates as that is a recipe for a string of failures within our diversity colleagues. I just know the kind of response I shall get here from this but hey, I really don't care. This is the correct thing to do.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 08 Dec 20 12.45pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
You really are a case aren't you? Faced by incontrovertible facts you still deny them. I didn't choose the slogan. Nor did they. The BLM political movement hijacked it but that doesn't mean that the sentiment which has inspired the players has any connection to them, especially when they have gone out of their way to deny it and reassure people. Those facts ought to kill these preposterous claims from you and others, but somehow I see chalk being described as cheese for a long time yet. So change the slogan. If Footballers want to disassociate from that history then they better stop using the same expressions. I also wish someone would also explain exactly what racism they are protesting about because this whole episode seems to have been inspired by the killing of a violent Black criminal who resisted arrest in another country. The whole thing is so bonkers that it has no credibility at all.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 08 Dec 20 12.45pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
You know that all players are for it because nobody has said they aren’t for taking the knee every week. Of course you’re right as usual. You’d be at risk of being crucified. They’re probably now at the point where they’re so focused on playing that this bollox is too stressful in potentially throwing them off their concentration and not worry getting involved in so just drop to one knee and remember the instructions and what they’re expected to do in the match. And on the subject of alleged regular abuse from the stands, I don’t see how taking the knee would change it. As I said, it’s becoming more divisive so is in danger of having the opposite effect. Who expected that? Oh just plenty of people while it continued. I am not in the dressing rooms any more than you are but I have been impressed by the level of solidarity that seems to exist and the words spoken by all the players who have offered opinions. They seem to believe that their worldwide exposure enables them to make a statement and they all want to be part of that. Quite frankly I doubt whether they care too much what a small group of supporters in south London think about it. If the coaches thought it was causing a distraction I would expect them to be doing something. As I have said I have no issue over whether people think its time for its retirement to indeed whether it will impact racism from the stands, but that's unimportant. It was never intended to. These days the people in the stands are there to provide the noise and the visual wallpaper for the real target market.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
W12 08 Dec 20 12.46pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
It is established that diverse organisations overall perform better and it is therefore financially and organisationally useful to try to get the balance correct. To encourage diversity some organisations may place a small additional weighting on a diversity candidate. But likely only in roles where diversity is relatively low compared to the benefit. So where someone is managing a highly diverse group or where currently there is little diversity. This is unlikely to cut in until senior levels. It is incredibly hard to hire Executive Directors from diversity backgrounds, I have had personal experience both here and in the US. I aim to ensure good diversity at one level below Executive to try to grow our own, given the scarcity. Remember that Diversity covers many areas, not just ethnicity or race. It is the case in London that you would aim for as near as possible 50% women at senior levels and ideally 34% ethnic diversity, 5% disabled and 4.5% LGBTQA. Plus a good age spread. This is almost never possible. I won't hire unqualified candidates as that is a recipe for a string of failures within our diversity colleagues. I just know the kind of response I shall get here from this but hey, I really don't care. This is the correct thing to do. "It is established that diverse organisations overall perform better" Yes, it is established in propaganda. How we were struggling before diversity came along.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 08 Dec 20 12.46pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Cucking Funt
Why's that, do you think? Because historically it has been hard for them to climb the ladder, to be senior you would have had to have started climbing at least 30 years ago. Organisations historically were not particularly positive towards people that were 'different'.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 08 Dec 20 12.47pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by W12
"It is established that diverse organisations overall perform better" Yes, it is established in propaganda. How we were struggling before diversity came along. No, in Share prices. But please, feel free to continue with your prejudices.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Eaglecoops CR3 08 Dec 20 12.51pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
It is established that diverse organisations overall perform better and it is therefore financially and organisationally useful to try to get the balance correct. To encourage diversity some organisations may place a small additional weighting on a diversity candidate. But likely only in roles where diversity is relatively low compared to the benefit. So where someone is managing a highly diverse group or where currently there is little diversity. This is unlikely to cut in until senior levels. It is incredibly hard to hire Executive Directors from diversity backgrounds, I have had personal experience both here and in the US. I aim to ensure good diversity at one level below Executive to try to grow our own, given the scarcity. Remember that Diversity covers many areas, not just ethnicity or race. It is the case in London that you would aim for as near as possible 50% women at senior levels and ideally 34% ethnic diversity, 5% disabled and 4.5% LGBTQA. Plus a good age spread. This is almost never possible. I won't hire unqualified candidates as that is a recipe for a string of failures within our diversity colleagues. I just know the kind of response I shall get here from this but hey, I really don't care. This is the correct thing to do. No it isn’t. These aren’t games that companies are playing. They want the best people for whatever job. Positive discrimination is a recipe for disaster, not success, that is just pampering to politics.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 08 Dec 20 12.54pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
So change the slogan. If Footballers want to disassociate from that history then they better stop using the same expressions. I also wish someone would also explain exactly what racism they are protesting about because this whole episode seems to have been inspired by the killing of a violent Black criminal who resisted arrest in another country. The whole thing is so bonkers that it has no credibility at all. BLM did NOT start "taking the knee". Colin Kaepernick did. That's the historical start and the players are merely supporting the tide of opinion that swept around the world. It wasn't George Floyd's history that created this movement. It was the way he died. People were outraged and sufficiently motivated to do something about it. That people like you don't get that is regrettable but kind of predictable.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 08 Dec 20 12.57pm | |
---|---|
Floyd to be the most popular name next year, after Mohammed of course.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 08 Dec 20 12.58pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Eaglecoops
No it isn’t. These aren’t games that companies are playing. They want the best people for whatever job. Positive discrimination is a recipe for disaster, not success, that is just pampering to politics. Well said! Nobody positively discriminates, it's illegal in the UK. In order to get the best people, Companies set criteria for assessing candidates. Based upon the organisation's objectives and the role requirements. That is what I have described. If you really want to pick a fight, try asking any major organisation which candidate they would favour ceteris paribus. As a tie break, they will normally go for the less 'standard' candidate - whatever that may be in their world - to increase the breadth of thinking.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Spiderman Horsham 08 Dec 20 1.13pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
It is established that diverse organisations overall perform better and it is therefore financially and organisationally useful to try to get the balance correct. To encourage diversity some organisations may place a small additional weighting on a diversity candidate. But likely only in roles where diversity is relatively low compared to the benefit. So where someone is managing a highly diverse group or where currently there is little diversity. This is unlikely to cut in until senior levels. It is incredibly hard to hire Executive Directors from diversity backgrounds, I have had personal experience both here and in the US. I aim to ensure good diversity at one level below Executive to try to grow our own, given the scarcity. Remember that Diversity covers many areas, not just ethnicity or race. It is the case in London that you would aim for as near as possible 50% women at senior levels and ideally 34% ethnic diversity, 5% disabled and 4.5% LGBTQA. Plus a good age spread. This is almost never possible. I won't hire unqualified candidates as that is a recipe for a string of failures within our diversity colleagues. I just know the kind of response I shall get here from this but hey, I really don't care. This is the correct thing to do. Thanks for taking the time to reply
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 08 Dec 20 1.19pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I am not in the dressing rooms any more than you are but I have been impressed by the level of solidarity that seems to exist and the words spoken by all the players who have offered opinions. They seem to believe that their worldwide exposure enables them to make a statement and they all want to be part of that. Quite frankly I doubt whether they care too much what a small group of supporters in south London think about it. If the coaches thought it was causing a distraction I would expect them to be doing something. As I have said I have no issue over whether people think its time for its retirement to indeed whether it will impact racism from the stands, but that's unimportant. It was never intended to. These days the people in the stands are there to provide the noise and the visual wallpaper for the real target market. You’ve pretty much said what many think. We may as well not turn up as we’re just part of the cleansed marketing package. If you think football players think solely like that then frankly they’re too stupid and shouldn’t be in the position to promote and spread visual displays they don’t understand. In a lot of cases this is the case, but you’re claiming there aren’t any anywhere thinking this isn’t what he wants to do, including the QPR players who went along with black ales Ferdinand’s wish to not take the knee, which makes your assumption even less credible.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.