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

I have been severely disabled since birth, having been born without eyes and with multiple joint deformities. I had an excellent education, largely due to my wonderful parents fighting tirelessly for me to have access to the resources and support I required. I did very well at school and received a first class degree from a top university.
However, despite my excellent academic qualifications, it is extremely unlikely that any workplace would have taken me on had it not been for graduate schemes aimed at disabled people. The equipment and support I require to do my job make employing me more complicated and expensive than someone without my disability so, if a company were not making an attempt to make their workplace a welcoming and accessible place for disabled people, they would be much more likely to hire someone without my extra support needs, even if they were less qualified.
If it weren't for 'positive discrimination' I would almost certainly be unemployed and become one of the 'work-shy disabled benefits scroungers' that the delightful posters on this thread objecting to diversity initiatives and whinging about reasonable adjustments probably also moan about on the countless benefits bashing threads that appear on MN every week.

The working class aren't going to have the same career trajectory as people in the middle class.

This is relevant. Looking at who is in power now isn’t. Executives now reflect the demographic makeup of the UK 35 years ago.

Looking at the racial makeup of academic high achievers today makes sense. From these numbers, if a graduate scheme has 20 places, 7 of those places should go to white men and 3 to BAME men.

I think you're partly struggling because every time I say white MIDDLE CLASS men, you change it to white men, missing out the very important words I've put in capitals and thus significantly changing the meaning and getting yourself muddled.
You also swap and change between white men and white people. So, lets be clear:
80% of people in the uk are white.
40% of people in the UK are white men.
15% of people in the UK are white middle class men.
Its the last group, the 15% I'm talking about.
A representative society would expect this 15% to be roughly reflected in the positions of power and privilege in our society. Yet 73% of roles paying over £100k are occupied by white men from middle class backgrounds. So 15% taking 73% of the top roles. Not representative.
Make sense now?

I think you're partly struggling because every time I say white MIDDLE CLASS men, you change it to white men, missing out the very important words I've put in capitals and thus significantly changing the meaning and getting yourself muddled.
You also swap and change between white men and white people. So, lets be clear:
80% of people in the uk are white.
40% of people in the UK are white men.
15% of people in the UK are white middle class men.
Its the last group, the 15% I'm talking about.
A representative society would expect this 15% to be roughly reflected in the positions of power and privilege in our society. Yet 73% of roles paying over £100k are occupied by white men from middle class backgrounds. So 15% taking 73% of the top roles. Not representative.
Make sense now?

I think you're partly struggling because every time I say white MIDDLE CLASS men, you change it to white men, missing out the very important words I've put in capitals and thus significantly changing the meaning and getting yourself muddled.
You also swap and change between white men and white people. So, lets be clear:
80% of people in the uk are white.
40% of people in the UK are white men.
15% of people in the UK are white middle class men.
Its the last group, the 15% I'm talking about.
A representative society would expect this 15% to be roughly reflected in the positions of power and privilege in our society. Yet 73% of roles paying over £100k are occupied by white men from middle class backgrounds. So 15% taking 73% of the top roles. Not representative.
Make sense now?

I'm sorry, whaaaaat?

There is socio economic criteria used to define working class based on income and occupation. It's a little more measurable than self identification. Doesn't matter what you consider yourself to be. What you do for a living and how wealthy you are will be the criteria used to define you by society. No one cares what class you call yourself but if your DC get FSM they'd be considered eligible for the diversity scheme in the OP on the grounds of socioeconomic disadvantage.

what do you think it means? You seem adamant that’s it’s unfair white men “dominate” many fields despite having it explained to you that

a. This country is majority white
b. Men don’t have to deal with the career interruption of pregnancy and breastfeeding
and c. “Working class” in all those studies is worked out by looking at who gets fsm of which the household income needs to be sub 7.4k, making the vast majority of people middle class.

and still you insist white men are 15% of the population and it’s unfair.

I remember seeing someone try to do the same with Jews in the American film business and Indians as doctors and it was called out (personally I’m of the mind that it’s good for them if they work hard and that’s what they want to do) but what gets me up is it’s apparently fine to do it about white men

what do you think it means? You seem adamant that’s it’s unfair white men “dominate” many fields despite having it explained to you that

a. This country is majority white
b. Men don’t have to deal with the career interruption of pregnancy and breastfeeding
and c. “Working class” in all those studies is worked out by looking at who gets fsm of which the household income needs to be sub 7.4k, making the vast majority of people middle class.

and still you insist white men are 15% of the population and it’s unfair.

I remember seeing someone try to do the same with Jews in the American film business and Indians as doctors and it was called out (personally I’m of the mind that it’s good for them if they work hard and that’s what they want to do) but what gets me up is it’s apparently fine to do it about white men

there Are not as many men who are not white as there are men who are white in this country.

And as I said the majority of men are statistically middle class as in all these studies they use fsm status to determine who is working class.

Someone calling themselves Working/middle class is as relevant as what gender a teenager identifies as my kid gets fsm but I don’t go around describing my family as working class but people on the internet will call themselves working class because their grandad worked in a mine 80 years ago.

I apologise for overestimating you too I don’t think you know what over representation means

What do you think representation means?

Excuse me? Yes - in many cases, these are the stated eligibility requirements. She ticks one box (state school) and that’s it. She’s not black, not a refugee, not a traveller, not disabled, not estranged from us, etc etc etc etc

there Are not as many men who are not white as there are men who are white in this country.

And as I said the majority of men are statistically middle class as in all these studies they use fsm status to determine who is working class.

Someone calling themselves Working/middle class is as relevant as what gender a teenager identifies as my kid gets fsm but I don’t go around describing my family as working class but people on the internet will call themselves working class because their grandad worked in a mine 80 years ago.

I apologise for overestimating you too I don’t think you know what over representation means

@Holluschickie
it's certain that you have a very bright son who works very hard and will make an outstanding career and you should be very proud of him.

It is equally possible that there were many white middle class candidates with four A stars and Oxford 1st who were equally good, so when it came to the final choice your son's skin color was a deciding factor.
E.g. it's well know fact that Oxbridge prioritises diversity candidates.

Look at this stats:

Ethnicity | University of Oxford
ediinformationreport_2022-23.pdf (page 45, UK domicile students)

% of BAME across 19-25 yo UK population is 23.6%
% of BAME students amongst those who achieved AAA or better at A-levels is 27.2%
% of BAME students at Oxford is 30.8%
% of BAME students at Cambridge is 30.4%

This difference in representation in the same cohort of achieving AAA or better is not statistically insignificant.

I'm sorry, whaaaaat?

I mean it’s possible, yes. If he was white with the same qualifications would he have been looked at as favourably? Hard to tell.

I don’t see many people saying what about the whites. What I’ve seen is every white person who does well getting called privileged and every white person that does badly getting called lazy or the product of generations of lazy white parents.

But when a black person does badly white people are blamed for that too, when a black man kills another black man people blame whites.

In banking it is the reality, same in insurance, at least what I've heard from people I know who work in global, top UK banks/insurance.

Not everyone, obviously, but these people - very senior - commented on how out of 12 and 15 intake, only 1 and 2 males respective. All others diversity/females.

I understand that. And I get the frustration. I also acknowledge there has been some clumsy and flawed implementation of EDI policies.
The point I'm making is that the principle of EDI, to try and level the playing field so disadvantaged people can compete for roles is not to blame.
Young graduates from the group you are describing are not failing to get jobs because there's a few schemes open to people who are not them. It's because we've flooded the market with graduates, particularly in some sectors, and there's simply not enough graduate positons to go round. Law being a prime example, where there's 19k graduates competing for 5k available positions.

You need a third group:

• those that want equity.

Equality doesn't mean fairness as we are not all equal in the first place. Equality would not help the white working class boys as they are behind the starting line in the first place.