I never said that they will. I'm just wondering how are they gonna do things differently to meet those numbers. I'm sure their current hiring process isn't biased towards a particular race/gender. To make it more balanced, are they planning to have a different hiring bar?
If it is similar to the Rooney Rule, no. The bar is the same, just required to consider a minority candidate.
I personally find tangible monetary value in employees with diverse backgrounds but I don't lower my bar. I just slightly discount sameness and slightly appreciate difference.
@infosample, you are right. You cannot assume minorities and women will under-perform or are under the bar. The issue of people just don't give it enough thought when hiring. At the same time, you should not hire someone solely based on their gender or race. But if there are 2 candidates with very similar skill sets and meet the standards you are looking for, hire the one who will bring you more diverse background.
This is why the discussion can't even happen, and why companies and universities still enforce percentages for underprivileged groups even though it is obvious discrimination (but it's "good" discrimination! Give me a break).
Person 1 says that enforcing a 50 people of type A and 50 people of type B when the number of qualified candidates is 20 and 80 will result in either hiring significantly fewer people in general, or hiring under qualified people of type A. People of type B are being passed over because of their race/gender/ethnicity. This is discrimination.
Person 2 says that implying that anyone of type A could be under qualified is itself discrimination, and this possibility should not be addressed or considered. Nothing can change because the issue cannot be discussed.
It helps to have a discussion when affirmative action and the Rooney Rule aren't conflated.
We have a tendency to assume type A is qualified and type B isn't. That is a natural bias based on evidence. We must actively subdue our biases if we want to overcome them, sometimes with rules.
I think we sometimes forget that the goal isn't to get a qualified employee but a successful employee. Qualifications generally leads to success but not always, so we should constantly question our qualification criteria.
White males have benefited from discrimination for a long time.
White males have been discriminated against sometimes.
This article isn't about discrimination or affirmative action.
It's about setting a goal to be more diverse, not by lowering the bar, or forced hiring, but through awareness, inclusion, and an opportunity to interview.
BTW, everyone's been given a chance they didn't deserve.
