This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Let’s celebrate the left
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Mapletree  Croydon 27 Jan 23 5.15pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Page 3 of the report states: 'Section 1 concerns “Equality, Diversity and Inclusivity” (EDI) positions and training. Ten thousand EDI jobs are costing the UK taxpayer £557 million a year, as well as 1 million working days lost. The money saved from these positions could fund around 12,500 nurses.' What happened to the equity? Swapped shares for debt by the sounds of it. The report reveals that public sector organisations employ 10,000 members of staff to deal with issues focused on equality, diversity and inclusivity (EDI). I would love to know the definition. It doesn't say they are specifically EDI positions as is implied. As an HR Director, I have spent quite a bit of my life managing diversity related issues. I have worked in public sector organisations and also, importantly, in supplier organisations which are included in this report. 'Arms-length organisations and contractors'. So I must be one of those 10,000. There are lies, damned lies and Conservative think tanks. Maybe if there really were 10,000 EDI practitioners then the Police would not have been found to be institutionally racist. The only fairly sensible part I can see is where they state that on average local authorities have two EDI practitioners. To me that sounds about correct, no? In Croydon that would be one per 5,000 staff.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Mapletree Croydon 27 Jan 23 5.16pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
You think it is ok then to fund such organisations. Do I? I didn't know I had an opinion. Thanks for helping.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 27 Jan 23 5.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
You think it is ok then to fund such organisations. If by such organisations you mean e.g. The Association of Surgeons or The Royal College of Anaesthetists, yeh, I'd say it's pretty worthwhile.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 georgenorman 27 Jan 23 5.20pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
What happened to the equity? Swapped shares for debt by the sounds of it. Perhaps you should invest in a dictionary:
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| georgenorman 27 Jan 23 5.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
If by such organisations you mean e.g. The Association of Surgeons or The Royal College of Anaesthetists, yeh, I'd say it's pretty worthwhile. As you well know, we were referring to the UK Health Alliance on Climate Change where you dismissed the £110 million of tax-payers money they have received since 2017 with 'SFW'.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| georgenorman 27 Jan 23 5.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
What happened to the equity? Swapped shares for debt by the sounds of it. The report reveals that public sector organisations employ 10,000 members of staff to deal with issues focused on equality, diversity and inclusivity (EDI). I would love to know the definition. It doesn't say they are specifically EDI positions as is implied. As an HR Director, I have spent quite a bit of my life managing diversity related issues. I have worked in public sector organisations and also, importantly, in supplier organisations which are included in this report. 'Arms-length organisations and contractors'. So I must be one of those 10,000. There are lies, damned lies and Conservative think tanks. Maybe if there really were 10,000 EDI practitioners then the Police would not have been found to be institutionally racist. The only fairly sensible part I can see is where they state that on average local authorities have two EDI practitioners. To me that sounds about correct, no? In Croydon that would be one per 5,000 staff. The report was compiled from information obtained from Freedom of Information Requests to 6,000 public authorities. The information requested was the number of full time equivalent roles in the organisation that are mainly or exclusively focused on issues of equality, diversity or inclusivity (excluding general HR professionals).
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 27 Jan 23 5.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
As you well know, we were referring to the UK Health Alliance on Climate Change where you dismissed the £110 million of tax-payers money they have received since 2017 with 'SFW'. No. I dismissed your comment with SFW. As usual it aims to open a different discussion when you start to lose the current one.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 27 Jan 23 5.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
The report was compiled from information obtained from Freedom of Information Requests to 6,000 public authorities. The information requested was the number of full time equivalent roles in the organisation that are mainly or exclusively focused on issues of equality, diversity or inclusivity (excluding general HR professionals). Which organisation? And how did they get that information from 'arms-length contractors'? Do you really think KPMG, Accenture, Keir, BAE Systems or Raytheon would provide it? The whole thing is BS. Just a bunch of entitled rich people trying to get the neanderthals excited about a dog whistle issue to excuse them objecting to paying for what is needed. As a reminder we pay a little more than a third per head than the US in healthcare. But this lot wants us to believe we should be able to save so much money there is no need to pay more into the NHS. In order to save themselves some of the tax that they pay at relatively lower rates than those that earn less then them. Edited by Mapletree (27 Jan 2023 5.42pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| georgenorman 27 Jan 23 5.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Which organisation? And how did they get that information from 'arms-length contractors'? Do you really think KPMG, Accenture, Keir, BAE Systems or Raytheon would provide it? The whole thing is BS. Just a bunch of entitled rich people trying to get the neanderthals excited about a dog whistle issue to excuse them objecting to paying for what is needed. As a reminder we pay a little more than a third per head than the US in healthcare. But this lot wants us to believe we should be able to save so much money there is no need to pay more into the NHS. In order to save themselves some of the tax that they pay at relatively lower rates than those that earn less then them. Edited by Mapletree (27 Jan 2023 5.42pm) Organisations approached included: • central government departments, There is a legal requirement for organisations to provide answers to Freedom of Information Requests.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 27 Jan 23 6.05pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Organisations approached included: • central government departments, There is a legal requirement for organisations to provide answers to Freedom of Information Requests. So they didn't approach the arms length suppliers as quoted then? Oh, I see. Good job they didn't as they would have had no authority. And I wouldn't put too much belief in FOI if I were you, having been responsible for its provision on more than one occasion. If it costs more than £450 to answer you simply refuse. Also, for the avoidance of doubt. The inequalities that ED&I people aim to address relate to all protected characteristics. Much of it is focused on women's opportunities in general proving less than men's. But presumably as far as this report is concerned that isn't relevant, women should just grin and bear their lot. It's all woke nonsense eh?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| georgenorman 27 Jan 23 7.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
So they didn't approach the arms length suppliers as quoted then? Oh, I see. Good job they didn't as they would have had no authority. And I wouldn't put too much belief in FOI if I were you, having been responsible for its provision on more than one occasion. If it costs more than £450 to answer you simply refuse. Also, for the avoidance of doubt. The inequalities that ED&I people aim to address relate to all protected characteristics. Much of it is focused on women's opportunities in general proving less than men's. But presumably as far as this report is concerned that isn't relevant, women should just grin and bear their lot. It's all woke nonsense eh? Well yes, the majority of it is certainly woke nonsense.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
HKOwen  Hong Kong 27 Jan 23 11.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Which organisation? And how did they get that information from 'arms-length contractors'? Do you really think KPMG, Accenture, Keir, BAE Systems or Raytheon would provide it? The whole thing is BS. Just a bunch of entitled rich people trying to get the neanderthals excited about a dog whistle issue to excuse them objecting to paying for what is needed. As a reminder we pay a little more than a third per head than the US in healthcare. But this lot wants us to believe we should be able to save so much money there is no need to pay more into the NHS. In order to save themselves some of the tax that they pay at relatively lower rates than those that earn less then them. Edited by Mapletree (27 Jan 2023 5.42pm) Who are the neanderthals you refer to?
Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.