[Wutang]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...editorial/

I know some people are going to read the first part of this article and roll their eyes since it sounds like typical "we need more diversity" claptrap but keep reading. I support this measure: remove the name on a resume and only have the applicant's educational history, experience, and qualifications. Being a female or a gay tranny Muslim will be neither a hindrance nor a benefit, as it should be if a meritocracy is what we are aiming for.

[Basil Ransom]

Great idea. At some point you'd have to refer to the job applicant by name, but for just the first step of getting a call or email back for an interview, this alone could have a great impact.

But it will fail, because it will never be implemented. The diversity bean counters would object to it. When a company hires a "low" number of a protected group after using this technique, it will come under scrutiny and risk getting sued by the Department of Justice.

[Sonsowey]

Would be interesting for sure. But the amount of people who even get jobs based on just sending out their resumes is tiny as is. Who here got a job that way, as opposed to knowing someone who knew someone?

[Tuthmosis]

A lot of people aren't hired because of their ethnic-ass names; this has been demonstrated repeatedly by various experiments where they controlled for everything except the name.

I think you'd find most minorities in support of this.

[Basil Ransom]

Regarding Jose:

Traditionally, libertarians argue that antidiscrimination legislation is unnecessary because discriminating on non job performance related factors is costly, and thus discriminatory businesses would be driven out of business in a competive market. So to fight discrimination, the government should keep regulations minimal to heighten competition.

But in an economy like ours where unskilled job openings have dozens of people applying for them, excluding say, all Hispanic men may not be that costly to the business. With Jose here, businesses probably figured "Jose? Does he speak English well? Without an accent? I've got all these other resumes, think I'll just go with a Bruce or Jane." And that may make sense - that assumption may reduce the time and effort he has to spend to find an employee. But if everyone does that, Jose goes without a job. It's sort of like being stuck at a traffic light that's always red, because there are always way more people driving through it in the perpendicular direction, such that a calculation to maximize utility means you never move and the light for you remains red forever.

The problem with popular treatments of discrimination is that they assume it's always done out of irrational racism, and not out of some rational calculation. To say something is rational is not to say it is ethical or moral, of course. And so people often misunderstand why discrimination takes place, and how to effectively limit it - sometimes, people don't really want to understand why discrimination occurs, lest they are led to embrace an unsettling truth.

[Sebastian]

I adopted American name to use at a bar initially. I changed my email name too after sending out emails to find a roommates and didn't get none of replies. I can't change my last name though which is like 'sounds like asian too me'. At least, it looks like I am americanized asian than FOB.

[Sombro]

One would think that someone's who is already "scientifically-minded" would already ignore the name and look at the merits of the argument presented.

Is this really necessary? If it is, it's still pretty sad.

[lskdfjldsf]

In Germany and other parts of Europe you're expected to attach a photo to your CV.
Fair game I'd say - if you want to be part of the mainstream, you have to look the part (good luck finding gainful employment if you're a fat, inked up, pan-queer otherkin)

I think any discrimination in the US is a result of minorities own legislative success; companies open themselves up to a range of law suits. The average white guy isn't going to complain or hire a lawyer if he's passed up for a promotion, or if he has the feeling he's paid less than others. It all depends on the field though - in sales, no one will hire an Indian/Pakistani guy because it gives off a telemarketing vibe.

[Phoenix]

A reminder that in some States, there is not true 'employment-at-will'. There are 'inability to fire' risks imposed on companies by the State, which cause them to raise their scrutiny in the hiring process.

One of the instincts this creates is to hire the 'most vanilla' person you can find. The person who can do the job, but ticks as many 'majority' boxes as possible. Normally a man, since he can't give birth. Normally an ethnic majority, since he can't claim and sue for 'discrimination'. Any non-normal personalities, sexual orientations, transgender people etc, will also be screened out. If you don't know if they will be a fit in your company, you can't take the risk of not being able to fire them, especially when they have the power to sue you for 'discrimination'.

This instinct also encourages 'Joe Smith' to get hired over 'Likaj Xhemajil'.

Never blame a free market when there isn't one there.

I'd be interested to know what percentage of minority-group unemployment is caused by Leftist government (minimum wage, firing and hiring risks, welfare etc). I'm guessing its a large percentage.

[Suits]

(11-04-2014 02:12 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

A reminder that in some States, there is not true 'employment-at-will'. There are 'inability to fire' risks imposed on companies by the State, which cause them to raise their scrutiny in the hiring process.

One of the instincts this creates is to hire the 'most vanilla' person you can find. The person who can do the job, but ticks as many 'majority' boxes as possible. Normally a man, since he can't give birth. Normally an ethnic majority, since he can't claim and sue for 'discrimination'. Any non-normal personalities, sexual orientations, transgender people etc, will also be screened out. If you don't know if they will be a fit in your company, you can't take the risk of not being able to fire them, especially when they have the power to sue you for 'discrimination'.

This instinct also encourages 'Joe Smith' to get hired over 'Likaj Xhemajil'.

I'm not sure if I'm familiar enough with the topic to immediately agree with you, but this is a fascinating theory.

Quote:

Never blame a free market when there isn't one there.

I love this.

[WestIndianArchie]

(11-03-2014 09:56 PM)Wutang Wrote:  

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...editorial/

I know some people are going to read the first part of this article and roll their eyes since it sounds like typical "we need more diversity" claptrap but keep reading. I support this measure: remove the name on a resume and only have the applicant's educational history, experience, and qualifications. Being a female or a gay tranny Muslim will be neither a hindrance nor a benefit, as it should be if a meritocracy is what we are aiming for.

I've read that when top orchestras decided to put a curtain between them and auditioning orchestra members, the # of women who got those jobs shot up.

It's sort of a limited fix to the overall problem of scarce resources. (and arguably "hoarding" by winners)

WIA

[ElBorrachoInfamoso]

(11-04-2014 02:12 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

Never blame a free market when there isn't one there.

This needs to be drilled into people's heads.

(11-04-2014 02:12 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

I'd be interested to know what percentage of minority-group unemployment is caused by Leftist government (minimum wage, firing and hiring risks, welfare etc). I'm guessing its a large percentage.

I think it was Thomas Sowell who pointed out that before minimum wage laws and the EEOC, black males had a higher labor force participation rate and lower unemployment than white males.

[Statsi]

I'm actually pro this, I've been saying something similar for a while. With the exception where appearance is an issue I think anonymous testing or any objective way of measuring merit and ability should be used for employment. I am torn because generally I am free market and don't like to interfere with how people run their business, but since nepotism is pretty rampant is most non competative industries I would advocate for anonymous employment based on a transparent set or criteria, scored and weighted however the business wishes.

I would extend this further to sentencing, have the conviction done as it is currently, but then have a second judge look over the conviction without any identifying traits on there. Leave anything the justice system deems to be important when it comes to sentencing and we'd have much fairer sentences. So saying has previous convictions is important, but saying 'is black' is not.

[Parlay44]

Names be damned. A resume just gets you the interview. You have to be confident and interview well and know your shit or they won't consider you at all. At the end of the day it's all about how good of a fit you'll be for the team. Can you socialize well? Can you communicate well? Can you meld into the structure well?

[The_CEO]

In some countries in S. America and elsewhere I'm sure, the standard is putting a profile photo's on the CV!

[turkishcandy]

A few years ago I was in charge of a project that aimed to introduce local Turkish high school students to international university students. I was supposed to bring a couple people from each country (as many countries as possible) and have them teach English and teach about their culture to the local students here. The goal was to promote diversity and give these local students an experience they would never forget, since they couldn't afford to travel and meet foreigners.

As you can guess, the more diverse the team was, the more successful the project would be. So I did my best to bring as many different nationalities as possible. But the project hit a wall when it came to recruiting from Western Europe and North America. After tens of interviews with people from countries like France, U.K, U.S, The Netherlands, I couldn't find anyone but minorities. I mean I had easily filled my quota for Asians and Arabs before, so why would I bring another Asian from U.S and an Arab from UK? No matter whether they were born in U.S or in Asia/Middle East, they are not much different than the Asian and Middle Eastern recruits when it comes to looks and mentality. Their birthplace only changes their accent and somewhat affects how extroverted they are and that's it. A British Achmed will never be as British as James. Now what the hell was I supposed to do? Recruit 50 Arabs from NA/WE region? I need somebody to teach these kids about French Culture, what will I do with a praying, festing Muslim?

To get what I'd like to call ''100% American/British/French'' I started asking about their origin, birthplace, the native language of theirs and their parents in the interviews. I had to be as racist as possible to get the job done because 49 out of every 50 applicants were of immigrant origin regardless of their names.

The point is, race matters. It matters not because of the color of skin (not to me anyway) but because of the origin of nationality and culture. I gladly recruited an African American and the kids loved him. But your average Chang is likely to be born and have been raised in a traditional Chinese family, with Chinese friends, Chinese mentality and Chinese customs. Same goes with Jose, Achmed, Mohammed.

The Jose in the video might be an exception to this due to the way he was raised or how well he improved himself, but picking a random applicant with a name like 'Jose' is not a safe bet if you are looking for an American with an American mentality to deal with clients and customers.

[The Beast1]

Going to be flamed, but I don't see the problem.

As a white guy, I'd expect to run into problems trying to get a factory job in India or China with a name like mine. Racism is a worldwide phenomena . I'd change my first name to something else if I had to do such a thing.

[Phoenix]

I kind of agree too. I'm not particularly attached to my name. It's just a label, and if there is information in that label, I'm fine with changing it.

For instance, if I was doing business in Japan, and I could speak Japanese, I would take a Japanese name. A foreigner who takes a Japanese name is specifically communicating: I can speak Japanese; and I understand Japaneses ways of doing things.
Since I cannot speak Japanese fluently, I don't do this, and thus in my dealings I will screen out more people who don't want to deal with foreigners due to communication gaps. This suits both sides.

[YossariansRight]

I was told by a woman that I interviewed with (this person was a "peer" as I got the job and had to work with her directly) back in 2007 that she used my town assessor database to look me up prior to my interview and my house was better than her's was.

Very fucking creepy! I removed my address from my CV and pretty much everything else after that was revealed.

I'm so glad I have my own business now; no need to put up with shit like that.

And she was a fat pig who later on told me she had an open marriage. No, I did not bang.

[Jack198]

(11-04-2014 02:12 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

A reminder that in some States, there is not true 'employment-at-will'. There are 'inability to fire' risks imposed on companies by the State, which cause them to raise their scrutiny in the hiring process.

One of the instincts this creates is to hire the 'most vanilla' person you can find. The person who can do the job, but ticks as many 'majority' boxes as possible. Normally a man, since he can't give birth. Normally an ethnic majority, since he can't claim and sue for 'discrimination'. Any non-normal personalities, sexual orientations, transgender people etc, will also be screened out. If you don't know if they will be a fit in your company, you can't take the risk of not being able to fire them, especially when they have the power to sue you for 'discrimination'.

This instinct also encourages 'Joe Smith' to get hired over 'Likaj Xhemajil'.

Never blame a free market when there isn't one there.

I'd be interested to know what percentage of minority-group unemployment is caused by Leftist government (minimum wage, firing and hiring risks, welfare etc). I'm guessing its a large percentage.

The paranoia on the part of employers can work the other way too - when was the last time you saw a young, hot flight attendant on a US carrier? The carriers go out of their way to find the most lawsuit-proof employees they can find since hiring a young hottie would open up all sorts of scrutiny from the various protected classes.

By comparison, when you fly Singapore Airlines all you'll see are hot, slim, extremely polite and well kept Asian women. When they reach 35 years old, if the flight attendant is not a supervisor she is still kept on by the company, but relegated to ground roles such as ticketing. Try THAT in the us and see how fast you wind up in court.

[heavy]

(11-03-2014 10:33 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

Would be interesting for sure. But the amount of people who even get jobs based on just sending out their resumes is tiny as is. Who here got a job that way, as opposed to knowing someone who knew someone?

I've gotten all my jobs by applying with my resume.

Edit: My current company has hired two people since me and both have been via resume application (unknown). The previous company I was with (as an analyst), the 3 hires I can think of were all hired as unknown applicants.

[Quintus Curtius]

Be very careful what you ask for, guys. The result may not be to your liking.

[WalterBlack]

(11-04-2014 09:36 AM)frenchie Wrote:  

Going to be flamed, but I don't see the problem.

As a white guy, I'd expect to run into problems trying to get a factory job in India or China with a name like mine. Racism is a worldwide phenomena . I'd change my first name to something else if I had to do such a thing.

They'd probably hire you as a manager - a lot of people have serious inferiority complexes when it comes to foreigners in those countries.

Or, they may hire you to represent the company - having a white employee is seen as prestigious.

Colour of money: Chinese firms rent white foreigners PER HOUR to get ahead in business

Quote:

Chinese companies are 'renting' white people in a bid to boost their chances of securing new business.

The firms hire fair-skinned foreigners as fake employees or business partners - sometines for as little as an hour.

Britons are among those hiring themselves out as fake tycoons, executives or office workers, according to a report by CNN.

Companies are happy to pay fair-skinned foreigners by the hour, the day or a week for what is known as 'White Guy Window Dressing,' 'White Guy in a Tie' events, 'The Token White Guy Gig,' or a 'Face Job.'

Firms advertise for 'pretty white women' or 'white men who look good in a suit' so they can boost their image by appearing to be successful international operators.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(11-04-2014 09:32 AM)turkishcandy Wrote:  

A few years ago I was in charge of a project that aimed to introduce local Turkish high school students to international university students. I was supposed to bring a couple people from each country (as many countries as possible) and have them teach English and teach about their culture to the local students here. The goal was to promote diversity and give these local students an experience they would never forget, since they couldn't afford to travel and meet foreigners.

As you can guess, the more diverse the team was, the more successful the project would be. So I did my best to bring as many different nationalities as possible. But the project hit a wall when it came to recruiting from Western Europe and North America. After tens of interviews with people from countries like France, U.K, U.S, The Netherlands, I couldn't find anyone but minorities. I mean I had easily filled my quota for Asians and Arabs before, so why would I bring another Asian from U.S and an Arab from UK? No matter whether they were born in U.S or in Asia/Middle East, they are not much different than the Asian and Middle Eastern recruits when it comes to looks and mentality. Their birthplace only changes their accent and somewhat affects how extroverted they are and that's it. A British Achmed will never be as British as James. Now what the hell was I supposed to do? Recruit 50 Arabs from NA/WE region? I need somebody to teach these kids about French Culture, what will I do with a praying, festing Muslim?

To get what I'd like to call ''100% American/British/French'' I started asking about their origin, birthplace, the native language of theirs and their parents in the interviews. I had to be as racist as possible to get the job done because 49 out of every 50 applicants were of immigrant origin regardless of their names.

The point is, race matters. It matters not because of the color of skin (not to me anyway) but because of the origin of nationality and culture. I gladly recruited an African American and the kids loved him. But your average Chang is likely to be born and have been raised in a traditional Chinese family, with Chinese friends, Chinese mentality and Chinese customs. Same goes with Jose, Achmed, Mohammed.

The Jose in the video might be an exception to this due to the way he was raised or how well he improved himself, but picking a random applicant with a name like 'Jose' is not a safe bet if you are looking for an American with an American mentality to deal with clients and customers.

I totally disagree with what you’re saying – there’s a huge difference between children of immigrants versus the culture of their parents country.

I came to the US for grad school, out of 200+ students, I was the only person from Europe & I’m not white. My parents are from India. Should they have turned me down because of my race? The only African guy was white – he was a white South African! Should be have been turned down?

Do you think it’s better to have somebody who knows something about a country rather than not have anybody at all?

I took part in a panel regarding international elections at my grad school. I represented the UK. The only people who ever gave a shit about my race were the students from China and Korea. It was a mindfuck for them to see a brown guy with an English accent.

There are some cultures who have problems fitting in to the cultures of the countries that they immigrate to e.g. Turks in Germany, Pakistanis/Bangladeshis in UK, Arabs in France, but that’s mostly down to the parenting style of the kids. My father always told me that I am British, not Indian. I’m proud of my Indian heritage, but unless somebody specifically asks, I never bring it up! I grew up watching British TV, watching Hollywood movies and I ate British food 50% of the time whilst I was growing up. What the fuck do I have in common with some guy from the village in Punjab who can’t speak English, grew up listening to bhangra music and watching Bollywood films?!

When I moved to the US, I found out how British I am, and it’s a lot. I don’t even hang out with Indians in Los Angeles – nearly all of my friends are not Indian. I went to a buffet with a Chinese-American woman at a country club on the weekend. I was easily the darkest customer there – did I give a shit? No! I felt in fitted in fine.

My real name doesn’t even seem Indian – my last name is Indian but passes as an English name (e.g. some Indian names pass like Tailor, Mann, Dillon) and my first name is English. My LinkedIn profile doesn’t have my photo on it. I guess I'm glad I have that name so that nobody has any preconceived stereotypes about me based on my name.

[The Beast1]

(11-04-2014 02:46 PM)WalterBlack Wrote:  

They'd probably hire you as a manager - a lot of people have serious inferiority complexes when it comes to foreigners in those countries.

Really? I remember hearing stories on Slashdot about a few guys experiencing racism in India. They were all told "Indian jobs are for Indians."

[turkishcandy]

WalterBlack you might have successfully adapted to the British culture and therefore make an exception to the introverted immigrant type I described in my post. Having said that, watching British TV and eating British food doesn't make you British just like sticking feathers up your butt doesn't make you a chicken.

You may have the British accent and the British passport and you can say ''I'm from U.K'' but it will still make a confusion when you say ''I'm British'' or when your friend introduces you as ''British'' to other people. Therefore, if a company wants to hire a British guy for representative purposes (for example a golf club I know hires only Brits to deal with clients) or if I need a British guy to represent England, you will be passed on. And I'm saying this with the deepest sympathy. This is not racism. This is life. You need to get over it, I know I did.