Is this employment policy at my work reasonable? **Title edited by MNHQ**

[MissRabbitsDayOff]

Name change. Long-term poster. This might sound goady but I'm just trying to see what people think about the following policy at my workplace.

At interviews, all candidates are given a score based on how well they do. In the rare event of a tie between a white person and a person from an ethnic minority background, the job will be offered to the person from the ethnic minority background to increase diversity.

YABU - The policy is unreasonable.
YANBU - The policy is not unreasonable.

@jellybellydancer

Why are only white people allowed an opinion on this thread?

I was wondering that too.

Seems fine to me. Would've stopped my colleagues from vetoing the black Carribbean guy who was better qualified than the Essex boy.

As a white person, I am learning about my privilege and how this has given me so many more opportunities than a POC. Unfortunately, the world we live in is still full of inherent racism, so we, white people, need to suck it up and accept policies like these as they will help us get the future we ALL deserve.

This positive discrimination should also be the same for gender in certain industries too.

Positive action if done fairly is fine, and if it’s a gueunine tie between two good candidates. I’m white but not British I’m ok with it.

I don't really have a problem but think this could be problematic for the employer. What if the white person is also disabled? Or an older worker? I think the policy has to think about all disadvantaged groups, not just one.

Yanbu - I think this policy is fine if the company/organisation is lacking in diversity. Especially if it is public sector and staffing doesn't reflect the community it serves. It benefits everyone to have diversity as you will hopefully end up with people with varied experiences that can result in fresh ideas and different perspectives.

@paralysedbyinertia

I'm white (and currently jobhunting, if it makes any difference). If there is a specific imbalance that they are trying to address, and all other things are genuinely equal, I would be happy to accept this. People of colour have faced so much disadvantage, I'm happy to see organisations trying to level the playing field. What else are they going to do - toss a coin?

What if it turns out the person of colour was Eton-educated and the white person came from a sink estate and was the first in their family to go to university?

(Not a hypothetical - at university I knew a Black Old Etonian)

I think it's fine if they otherwise score equally if the aim is to increase diversity.

In the rare event of a tie between a white person and a person from an ethnic minority background, the job will be offered to the person from the ethnic minority background to increase diversity.

Um.. why would it be rare for a white person and an ethnic minority to tie for a job?

Also, an ethnic minority can be considered a broad term. It could include someone who has pale/white skin but not considered white.

Hmm. I can see why they’re doing it but think there’s all sorts of issues, which probably haven’t been thought through... Might increase one specific type of diversity but not diversity in general.

i would have thought that was pretty standard practice in any fair and accountable work-place. going back many years. not a new idea.
why do some people think it's wrong.?

Im a firm believer of the right person for the job.

Understand the diversity aspect too, although it feels a little too simplistic.

It could easily be changed for male or female give the female the job?

What would happen if one party were asian and one black for example? And same again but one is male and one female?

Should there be a further 'blind' review in this scenario. An exam question, test or third party notes review with personal details redacted.

Its interesting to think about.

This system is only in place due to the lack of diversity in some workplaces, where ethnic minorities are massively underrepresented compared to our population. It's a real problem. If they score the same in an interview (which as you said is going to be rare), then yes I think that is the right approach.

I am a white woman. And I don't feel threatened by this policy as when I have interviewed, the jobs I got were because I was the best candidate! The jobs I didn't weren't right for me.

I am married to an ethnic minority and he and his family have often had to go above and beyond to obtain any role, and he hates the fact that there is a need for positive discrimination, but if things were more equal then these policies would no longer need to exist.

I don't mind. How else should they decide?

Why not have a second interview or assessment? Assuming such a tie/draw happens.

Completely unreasonable

@romdowa

It's called positive discrimination and its actually sad that policies like this even have to exist but they are necessary, it's the same with encouraging companies to hire people with disabilities

What about if the ‘white’ person is a single parent living in a refuge escaping DV whilst the ‘black’ person was a middle class singleton living life to the full? Or the ‘white’ person has a disability?

It doesn't just apply to race btw.

More info:

The positive action provisions mean that it
is not unlawful to recruit or promote a candidate
who is of equal merit to another candidate, if the
employer reasonably thinks the candidate:
• has a protected characteristic that is under-
represented in the workforce; or
• that people with that characteristic suffer a
disadvantage connected to that characteristic.

@greenalltheway

Some interesting thoughts there. I like the idea of a blind review too.

I often wonder what the outcome would be if they did this for political elections - you choose the candidate based on their policies rather than persona, which would reduce all the mud throwing and media spin. It would be interesting!

What if you're white, don't get the job but are a minority nationality in the UK?

About time. It's 2021, ethnic minorities have already had to put up with decades of being excluded from jobs and promotion in favour of White people.

I'd like to see diversity policies extended to include disabled people too. It's outrageous that disabled are almost invisible in society and working life. I've worked within organisations that have policies addressing this yet they somehow manage to never employ a physically disabled person, for instance.

I think it is problematic at the very least. Firstly I don't think all BAME groups should be lumped together as they are not at equal disadvantage. Secondly how does this leave other minorities e.g should a white, disabled female be considered second best to a male asian who is not disabled.

Op, to increase diversity, it is possible to create posts specifically for people with protected characteristics, rather than open to anyone then discriminating after interview.

It's a disgrace. It is discrimination, plain and simple. Change it for "give a space to someone based on their skin colour and refusing a space based on their skin colour", does it sound right to you?

However, I do wonder how the POC would feel if they knew that's what broke the tie, I would assume they'd be pretty offended?

Many POC’s already have to deal with the assumption that they got such jobs because of their race when often it was their abilities so it wouldn’t make much of a difference since the assumption is already there.