To Think that Grad & Apprenticeships are now only for Diversity Candidates

So you haven’t looked at the Bank of England schemes (and have conveniently ignored all the other discriminatory organisations).

The Black Heritage Sponsored Internship pays internees an additional £5000 towards living costs on top of the salary. White internees don’t get any additional help. They are excluded from that scheme because of their skin colour and that could mean they can’t access any internship on financial grounds.

Why shouldn’t 80% of the Bank of England staff be white and why is that relevant to you?

Yes, I'm happy for specific schemes that target minorities who historically haven't been given the same opportunities to exist. Like I said, it's imperfect, but lots of things are. Thinking pragmatically, I can't think of a better system, although I'm sure there is one. Similarly, I'm happy for Russell Group Universities - Oxbridge specifically, I suppose - to consider an application from a state school pupil differently to that of a fee-paying pupil.

Did you seriously make that comparison? I’m embarassed for you.

So you are happy for young people trying to enter the workplace to be discriminated against and excluded from schemes to address some perceived imbalance which actually reflects the demographics of the country when these ‘middle class white men’ started their careers?

Does that really sound fair to you?

Other PPs have explained why there are more men than women in more senior positions.

One of the Bank of England’s internship programmes

Key words there being ONE OF.

The BoE don’t exclude any applicants as a whole.

You act like 80% of the BoE’s staff aren’t white.

Exactly. What if enough people in that particular demographic just are not interested in particular careers or industries? Maybe there are cultural reasons why there are not sufficient numbers to meet the quota?

Maybe many poc prefer to work in advertising (I’m joking btw) - there is certainly a vast representation in that industry. Out of curiosity I counted the models in the Argos catalogue and it was 80% PoC. TV advertising seems to be similar.

So many professional sectors are overrun by middle class white men. Positive discrimination may be imperfect but I can't get worked up by certain schemes which offer minorities the chance to succeed where historically they haven't. I know there's outliers in each sector but broad brushstrokes, I think it's good. Reasonable adjustments are a separate issue, and one that probably needs a new thread as it's such a vague term. Would like to see stronger legal framework to support disabled would-be employees as I'm distrustful of Disability Confident employees automatically offering interviews if suitable... what defines suitable?

I think you’ll find the evidence if you actually read the thread.
The Bank of England, MI5, MI6, GCHQ, Aviva, the RAF, a major internship placement scheme. And those are just the ones that have been caught doing this.

From an article:
Bank of England under fire for internship that excludes white students
The institution says scheme is only open to candidates of ‘black or mixed black heritage’
One of the Bank of England’s internship programmes offer undergraduate students in their final year of study £5,000 towards living costs
Credit: Mike Kemp/Getty Images
Pui-Guan ManProperty Correspondent
22 October 2025 11:56am BST
The Bank of England has come under fire from leading Tory MPs and Elon Musk after advertising a £5,000-plus internship scheme that excludes white candidates.
The institution, which employs 4,000 people in Threadneedle Street, said one of its student internship schemes was only open to “black or mixed black heritage” candidates, meaning white or non-black candidates are unable to apply.
Under the programme, undergraduate students in their penultimate year of study receive £5,000 towards living costs, as well as an eight-week internship at the Bank paying £96.15 per day.

On the plus side, at least your daughter isn't a disabled, refugee in need of free school meals.

I’m not sure why so many struggle with the concept that while making reasonable adjustments to enable people with a disability to work - good wheelchair access to the office or reading software etc, is right and necessary,

excluding people from internships or recruitment programmes on grounds of their ethnicity or the occupations of their parents (I though we left that idea behind in the 1950s!) is not right or remotely ethical.

every so often white working class kids doing badly at school is in the news. No one bothers to find out they only mean kids on free school meals as working class. People rush to say white parents are just lazy and stupid.

Wheras if it was black kids doing badly at school those people wouldn’t dare say anything like that in fact they’d probably just say teachers are racist

If he's applying for banking and insurance those are just really competitive and highly paid. If he wants to get a foot in the door he'd be better off applying for a less competitive/sexy area but where he gets a door opening qualification like ACA, CISI or CFA.

So like a mid tier accounting firm. Or management finance team in a corporate. Or a bit of a niche area like VAT, or treasury.

C1 and above I think.
The FSM thing isn't saying to be WC you need earned income of £7.4k or less. They're saying children in a household with an earned income of £7.4 or less are financially disadvantaged. Which is hard to argue with surely?

The point is that POC don't lack the qualifications, we are talking about 100 people applying for a job who all have the same qualifications. If you are Black/brown/disabled/trans it is much more likely you will be discriminated against in the process. Now that many recruiters do blind applications this helps, but you still have the interview process to contend with. There is a lot of research about even unconscious bias towards names that don't sound English for example. It's not the case that unqualified people are being given jobs because they are POC.

I think it tends to mean C1 and above.

Ok but how was this worked out?
As I said earlier many of these studies use free school meals as what constitutes working class, meaning anyone earning over 7.4k is middle class.

Or job title? Like the train drivers on 80k and teachers on half of that?

the idea of working/middle class in 2026 is bullshit

My idea is assess it holistically and acknowledge the fact that to get this they've had to go through extra, showing the resilience under tough conditions.

Not just selecting them because of their disadvantaged background alone.

What is MC though? I always thought i grew up MC but actually I think we were probably WC. What is the basis for one or the other?

They can make their own success and try and educate themselves and improve their standing in life?

Not expected to be hired on dei metrics.

Many of the WC people I know have no value for education, have no drive and are happy just doing menial stuff and claiming whatever benefits they are entitled to.

You misunderstand again. It doesn't mean that 73% of people earning £100k are MC NOW, obviously. If it did you'd probably say 100% wouldnt you? It means, were always MC. As in born into a MC home.

I can’t believe UK gymnastics doesn’t have any 43 year old, fat lazy women in their team. Can I sue? No of course not. If I want to make the team I have to obtain the necessary skills.

Surely it’s discrimination to go out to recruit only people with certain attributes?

If people of colour are less likely to apply or are less likely to have the appropriate qualifications so be it. It’s not the employers fault.

It’s fine if these people don’t have the qualifications and skills others have. They shouldn’t be considered for jobs alongside those better qualified purely due to ‘not having the same life changes’. Thats patronising twaddle.

If they do have the skills and qualifications they should be judged alongside their equally qualified peers, not given a leg up. That again is patronising twaddle.

Groundbreaking idea - why on earth don’t we just judge people for what they’re like as a person and their skills rather than the stereotypes associated with of their background? If that gives us a workforce of 100 Bangladeshi middle class lesbians in wheelchairs, so be it. They’re the best people for the job.

It's exactly the same principle though - just as reasonable adjustments are meant to help those with severe disabilities to get a foot in the door - so too are the programmes for those of colour, or lower socioeconomic group.Why is one group who are discriminated against more worthy than another? And yes, there are those who say they are being discriminated against because they are able bodied in response to "disabled people getting priority" 🙄

You comment says otherwise.