While making an argument against diversity training Arwa Mahdawi makes a wonderful howler:
It is beyond question that every industry should be aiming for a workforce that is inclusive, non-discriminatory and accurately reflects the demographics of its market.
No, no, no! Every industry should be aiming for a workforce that is competent and meets the needs of its customers. Nothing more, nothing less. Colour of skin, sex, religious belief and all that bollocks is neither here nor there – or, at least, it shouldn’t be and wouldn’t be if it wasn’t for the identity politics brigade.
I can sort of see the argument for a business reflecting the demographics of the community in which it is based, but its MARKET?
Hmmm, is he going to tell the Indian restaurant trade, or shall I?
While he’s at it, perhaps he can work out how he’s going to get 50% women in the deep sea fishing industry, in the sewer maintenance industry, in the mining industry, in the car mechanic business, in the farming industry etc etc. Personally I can’t see many women being very happy they have to work in dangerous, smelly, dirty and physically hard work jobs, but hey, its all in the name of diversity.
Me, I fancy being a HR manager, as there’s going to have to be a few job losses there among the women there to even things up. They’ll have to retrain as pig farm workers or something similar.
Such fun!!!
@Longrider
Arwa Mahdawi wrote a good article, which more or less agrees with what you are saying. Yes, I read the article. She seems to be fairly feisty, and as much discriminated against by the Guardian by being ghettoised into a ‘minority’ interest post, as the very ghettoisation that the newspaper is complaining about…in fact she seems to be claiming it’s a class thing.
The Guardian (not she) is playing discrimination poker here.
In terms of running a business – of course it makes sense to understand the cultural nuances and language of your markets. That goes without saying, doesn’t it? And Arwa Mahwadi would no doubt agree: she seems a spunky sort of woman.
I did acknowledge this point in my opening sentence. However, the quoted passage is so wrong headed, it needed a challenge.
No, no, no! Every industry should be aiming for a workforce that is competent and meets the needs of its customers.
Must quote that at eleven.
Even more to the point ….
Every industry should be aiming for a MANAGEMENT that is competent and meets the needs of its customers.
Chance’d be a fine thing!
Ironically, the Guardian columnists, being almost exclusively privately and Oxbridge-educated, is one of the least diverse groups imaginable.
Not beyong question at all then.
I have often wondered where a firm would stand if their hiring process was designed like a blind scientific study where every aspect of the candidates, other that those that effect their ability to do the job, was filtered out. If they were then accused of discriminating against a particular minority they could point to this process and prove that they were not, even if said minority was under-represented on their staff.
I know of at least one railway company that strips all identifying features from CVs before forwarding them to the recruiting manager.
Now that is interesting. What a very good idea.
XX
No, no, no! Every industry should be aiming for a workforce that is competent and meets the needs of its customers.XX
Given.
But….
XX It is beyond question that every industry should be aiming for a workforce that is inclusive, non-discriminatory and accurately reflects the demographics of its market.XX
Is, in it’s self, not a BAD idea.
The trouble came when every bastard niche group they could invent, wanted a bite at the cherry.
Not conten with 10% blacks. They want “black lesbians” to have their share, and “black lesbian jehowas-jews”, or “black lesbian chocolate sucker jehowas-jews with one leg and a cat”, and…. and…THAT is where a possibly good idea REALLY hit the fan.
The answer to that is; “it depends”. If the ethos of the company reflects those values, then, yes, it is not in itself a bad thing. I would expect any half decent organisation to have a policy that covers such things as equal opportunity and bullying and harassment as a matter of course.
However, what should not be happening is recruitment, selection and promotion being based upon anything other than competence. Hence, my objection to the statement as quoted. The last thing we need is quotas that reflect the demographic market for example. I would expect a competent workforce to understand the company’s markets, but not necessarily to reflect them. The Chinese export to Europe, do they employ Europeans to manufacture the goods? Is it necessary that they do? Given their success, clearly not.
Nor for that matter should it be necessary for “diversity” to even be recognised. You leave your differences at home. At work, work matters are all that employees should be concerned with. I have no interest in the colour of my co-workers’ skins, their beliefs or what they keep in their pants or where they want to put it. None of my concern and I don’t want to know (let alone as some would have us do; “celebrate” it). Diversity, therefore is a nonsense.
So, businesses are encouraged to strive towards ends which meet social engineering requirements. As LR says; “industry should be aiming for a workforce that is competent and meets the needs of its customers”. Is this desire to engage in non-core activities one of the reasons that NOTHING seems to work in this country any more? NHS – don’t bother with making people better, get more diversity. Education – [I really don’t want to go there]. I fear that we have just gone too far down the wrong road to turn back to a more sensible path.