To report friend to FB for photo of her blacked up?

[Greyhound]

I'm really shocked - cousin of mine has pic of herself on Facebook blacked up. She is white. The picture is of her at a fancy dress party - she has covered her face in dark brown stage make up and is wearing an "Afro" wig and Rastafarian style striped hat.

Her husband is also blacked up.

Hissing all cvs are read. They are divided up so that of the partners and associates at the evening each will have 6 or 8 candidates whose cv they have read in detail whom they make a particular point of speaking to. Afterwards every single candidate and their cvs are discussed in detail by all the assessors and a group of about 20 are called for an in depth interview. Please feel free to make further criticism.

Sabrinnnnnna wow that is awful - and also why I think the cocktail party idea is bad- because it provides a context in a recruitment process where all those subtle prejudices can play out but in a way that is not overt, scored or accountable.

Im not criticising the reading of the CVs- I'm criticising the cocktail party as part of a recruitment process.

So hissing you expect to be employed sight unseen on the strength of a cv? For a profession where communication skills is vital?

I would not mind the day of tasks for applicants at all

Well the reality is many, many applicants for traineeships will get little more than a thanks but no thanks. We hear this time over from the ones we see.

nope. I would expect to make a written application, followed by a first interview which would include some tasks that test competencies for the actual job, followed possibly by a second interview.

I think that taking names off CVs is a good idea at the first stage because it attempts to screen for subconscious prejudice so that the most experienced and competent candidates make it through to interview.

You can assess communication skills at interview.

and the cocktail parties change this how?

I have reservations about the cocktail party too.

I realise it's a good test of communication skills and whatnot, but I think that it too easily becomes a test of 'fitting in' with the current employees/partners - and if those current employees are all white, privately educated males (not saying this is the case in your company phaedra - you've made it clear it isn't - I'm talking in general terms) - then the white, privately educated males are more likely to 'fit in' and feel comfortable. Hence more likely to do well and get onto the next interview stage.

Hissing really you're excellent at nit picking. No one is dismissed out of hand. Nerves are taken account of but a complete lack of social skills can't be overlooked. Applicants are encouraged to contact HR for feedback if unsuccessful, which they do and get.

The drinks party (to stop the fuming at that term) means unlike most, if not all firms of similar standing , we meet all applicants instead of binning all but the exceptional cvs. For some of them we may be the only firm they even set foot in.

I live in London and I know that none of my friends or acquaintances would deem blacking up to be acceptable. My own sister and brother posted photos of themselves blacked up for fancy dress, and a few sharp inhalations of breath happened amongst my friends here in response.

People don't think it's acceptable, for whatever reason. FB won't remove it, just as they won't remove revolting Britain First posts.

I wouldn't ever do it because of the reactions of my friends of colour, who do find it offensive, but I know that friends back in the West Country don't have a clue that anyone finds it offensive.

Im not nitpicking Im talking about cocktail parties in recruitment processes and answering your questions.

It may sound silly to you but i think these details are actually really important when trying to understand how privilege is institutionalised and reinforced. As Buffy so eloquently outlined up thread.

I think from all your responses its pretty clear that you think this is all a load of rubbish but I think its important to talk about these things.

I think these details are actually really important when trying to understand how privilege is institutionalised and reinforced.

Absolutely.

I think it's really tempting to think, when considering the cocktail party, that everyone has an equal chance to show off their social skills and so on - but it is also very subjective. Those doing the selecting may well have subconscious prejudices and could end up just interviewing those whose "face fits." And nobody can prove any different when, say, 10 white males are the ones who make it through to the next stage. Because "everyone had an equal chance".

Sabrina and Hissing so you'd prefer we just picked the best cvs and binned the rest? That's what most of our competitors do

I know one firm who don't look at anything below a 2.1 and rarely takes any one not from the traditional universities. No opportunity given to explain why there might be a good reason for what might be on paper not an exceptional cv.

You think "unconscious prejudices " don't come into play when assessing cvs? Perhaps all universities are equal?

Do you also seriously think out of say 100 candidates only men will be chosen? Well I suppose you probably do since both of you have such an insight into how legal trainees are chosen.

I don't think just men will be chosen and I am only responding to what you have told me about your recruitment processes.

And for what its worth I think it would be excellent if your firm welcomed applicants from a range of backgrounds and recognised and adjusted for privilege but I don't see how a cocktail party as part of a recruitment process does that.

In fact the main point of my argument is that it might actually do the opposite

Just to clear things up for those who think it's fine to black up

I am black and have attended lots of fancy dress fuctions and have never whited up my face to dress as that person I once went to a party dressed as they guy for status quo but never whited my face

And I don't think you will find many black people white up I can say I have never seen it never

I just find it very odd

Phaedra, there is no need to get so utterly defensive over your own company here.

I am talking generally here. I am delighted to hear your company is so progressive - but we are just examining ways that recruitment policies can appear fair in theory - but open to prejudices in practice.

Hissing believe what you want to believe.

We as a firm give every trainee applicant an opportunity to come along and meet us. They get a drink , have the opportunity to speak generally to our current trainees and assistants and particularly to the assessors who have read their cvs in advance.

It is supposed to last about 90 minutes and we are usually shoo'ing them out the door well after that as we have to go through and analyse. Far from being intimidating they seem to enjoy it.

Oh Hissing you've not said would you prefer we only saw the select few of the best written CVs ? That's what most firms do.

Phaedra. I think that you should decide what skills and experience you want in a candidate and create a selection system that screens for what you want.

As a separate issue I think that your firms/companies/sectors should look for and address structural discrimination and weed out practices that support and sustain privilege and exclusion as part of their ongoing practices. In an ideal world.

I don't think your drinks parties help with either of these things.

However, I also think that these events have changed from being described as cocktail parties (which are events associated with a specific social class) into a short drinks reception in the office- which is actually something entirely different.

Kinda makes it difficult to discuss it with you.

using the best written cvs might help with the first point but it may also sustain exclusion as if you only recruit from certain universities then you may end up with applicants only from public schools.

A sector that is interested in structural discrimination would put something in place to address and offset this privilege.

My point is that a successful intervention here would probably not be to include a cocktail party in the recruitment process.

Hissing are you reading anything. ? Where did I say we only recruit from only certain universities? Did you deliberately edit out the part where I said we give every trainee applicant a chance to come along and meet us? That's hardly not being inclusive.

You seem determined to twist and misinterpret everything I say. You are fixating to an absurd degree that serving drinks and snacks will be beyond the social skills of applicants. These are people who at the very least are 3 or 4 years into a degree or in the middle of their post - graduate diploma and are looking for a job in private practice, not school children.

But apparently you think picking out the best cv without giving the less star studded candidates a chance would be fairer.

I probably was a bit snide!

Personally, I think a nice drinks do would be a great way to cast extras for a BBC historical drama, but problematic as part of a rigorous recruitment process for a law firm.

Still, as far as I'm aware & so long as you aren't shown to be in breach of the law, you aren't required to account to the public wrt your recruiting policies, or to worry about how they might be perceived, so no need to justify your practice here - whatever phrase you use to describe the weeding out process.

Yes raven I suppose taking time to meet every trainee applicant who submits a cv as opposed to Hissing's preferred option of only interviewing the best on paper isn't fair.