Diversity schemes for young people - mixed race child.

[Florencesndzebedee]

I have a dc who is currently an undergraduate. I am mixed race, my dh is white. Dc is fair skinned but, through my heritage, also has black heritage (my dad is from the Caribbean).

The landscape is tough at the moment getting work placements/internships but some of these schemes are open to dc of black heritage only. My dc is reluctant to apply as he said he’d feel like a fraud, purely on looks - he looks like he might be Spanish or Greek but has blue eyes. The criteria are quite vague other than under represented people )within the organisation) of black/african /Caribbean heritage. I feel like he is entitled to apply and these schemes would give him more options.

Does anyone have any experience of these particular schemes or how they select?

A level playing field is exactly what we want. What we need to recognise is that we don't have that right now, which is why these schemes exist.

Treating people fairly does not necessarily equate to treating everyone in exactly the same way.

I've seen all the apparent 'research'. There's no research by any reputable organisation that haven't got an agenda from a political perspective.

Besides I've asked if you think it's fair, therfore to hire based on heritage or skin colour above merit which you seem to think it is? This puts people at an unfair disadvantage due to characteristics they had no choice over. That's never good.

Why are jobs not given based on ability anymore? Since when did this become a thing ( I’m mixed race btw - so are my kids) has your child been disadvantaged in anyway that you feel they would need to apply for this?

Black people, or brown, yellow, pink, orange and whatever colour they may be, ALL have equal rights under British law. That's the way it ought to be. There is NO justification for these schemes. They create jobs for those that may not deserve them.

What rights do white people have that any other rece doesn't in the UK?

People are at an unfair disadvantage due to characteristics that they have no choice over without these schemes, though. That's the whole point.

Taking positive action to create a level playing field is not putting white people at a disadvantage. It's about trying to even things out.

How though, I understand all too well why they say these schemes exist. My point is that there is no evidence of what they claim. Our laws address this specifically in giving everyone an equal opportunity. This scheme only offers opportunity based on an outcome where the only person getting the job is already determined to be someone of a certain skin colour.

Because we live in a capitalist society I actually believe if a company wants to be racist in their hiring practice go ahead. They'll naturally fail on their own as they're cutting out a large portion of the available talent.

Yellow, pink and orange people? WTF?

We do all have equal rights under the law. Unfortunately, there is abundant research which shows that those rights cannot be equally accessed or enforced by all.

You might not want to acknowledge that there is inequality baked into virtually every aspect of our society but it is real, even if you choose to look away or stick your fingers in your ears and stop listening. I find it rather sad that you are so resentful about the very small number of schemes which exist to try and make a tiny dent in that inequality.

White people really aren't being disadvantaged here.

I'm not sure if you're naive and wildly ignorant of how much inequality still exists, or whether you're just choosing to play dumb. There is plenty of reading material out there if you genuinely want to learn.

My Chinese DH was outright told “We don’t have anyone like you working here”. Hope that helps.

You can't create a level playing field by creating an unfair un-level playing field. I agree it should be equal. By the very nature of this scheme makes it unfair for white people and any other people who may be suitable for the position.

A level playing field is attained by making the job vacancy OPEN and then choosing the BEST most capable candidate, regardless of their colour or heritage. To assume that people hiring will be racist is nonsensical. It's in their own best interest to hire the the most competent person for the position.

This.

I suspect he has been though - indirectly via you and the family finances even if not directly.

What I am trying to say here is that if you were discriminated against then that would impact the finances of the family he grew up in.

If your son feels his heritage has not disadvantaged him then he probably shouldnt apply. However - his skin is pale but you say he might be taken for Spanish or Greek. His school will have known of his heritage and he may have met some prejudice because of it. Does his name also suggest a different heritage?

If he feels he has suffered some disadvantage then he can apply and talk about it should he get as far as an interview. It's always possible that if he gets a foot in the door by utilising this scheme they may give him another job that is not part of this scheme.

Where is the inequality? We are equal! If you believe you've been genuinely discriminated against based on the colour of your skin then we have courts and tribunerals that will make a judgement against someone for this.

What has happened is we've created an environment that rewards victimisation. So the first thing many people do, if for example someone of a specific race doesn't get the job they wanted over a white person, is to shout and scream racism when in reality this was nothing to do with it.

It's so damaging to black people to be told over and over they're disadvantaged and by default are seen as 'lesser than' by the society they live in. Please just stop this buying into the narrative and assuming because people say there is research that it exists, as it doesn't!

This!

I think for me it would depend on if he truly feels he is disadvantaged by his ethnicity or not.

If he fits the criteria, go for it. They're not going to pull out a colour chart or measure his cranium or anything. I always stick DS down for such advantages (why not? Its what they are for) and like yours, he probably looks more Mediterranean.

as above if he fits the criteria I would encourage him to apply
everyone else will be
the only person I know who benefitted from such a scheme was mixed race from a wealthy family , went to private primary and secondary and then off to a mid range Russell group uni - perfectly capable I’m sure of doing a good job

However Im not sure that’s who it’s aimed at so if they can benefit why shouldn’t your son !

If the criteria is “of black heritage” then he probably does qualify. I agree with the PP who said that “not black enough” is quite an offensive idea.

How would your son describe himself if he was filling out one of the diversity forms for HR? Those schemes are designed to address the fact that there is a lack of representation so if he fits that representation (by his own description) then he is helping balance it. Your dad must have faced huge amounts of discrimation so if this helps in some way rectify that then it's probably justice well served.

He might as well apply if he meets the criteria. Most of the people who benefit from these kinds of schemes aren't actually disadvantaged anyway, many from wealthy families and have had every advantage in life, so it's not like he is likely to be taking a place away from someone more in need of it than he is.

If you experienced adversity as a result of your heritage, then an element of that will have reflected on your DS. Possibly your own level of achievement, or some of your attitudes or things that have influenced how you brought him up.

Unless we think adversity and barriers are wiped out in one generation, then he qualifies.

I have not personally been discriminated against on the grounds of my race. But I'm white, so that isn't very surprising.

I have witnessed quite a lot of discrimination in the workplace, though. Occasionally overt and deliberate...I have had to discipline people for that. But more often, it is subtle and unintentional. And I have called people in for that too. Like the white male manager who was asked to put people forward to work on a development project. He was horrified when I pointed out to him that he had put forward 3 white males, and that he had ignored all of the other considerable "talent" in the team. He had not intended to be discriminatory, and I believe that he was genuinely upset when it was pointed out to him. It was just his subconscious bias that led him to imagine a white man working on that project.

My Asian DH has experienced a lot of discrimination in the workplace over the years. And in other settings. It is eye opening when you see it. And yes, there are courts and tribunals etc, but do you realise how much stress and work goes into actually evidencing discrimination? It's utterly exhausting, and very often, it is just easier for people to let it go. And who can blame them...it would be totally soul destroying to have to constantly fight just to get your basic rights enforced. People are worn down and worn out by it, and sometimes it just isn't worth the aggro... why should people have to constantly cycle up a steep hill simply to stay in the same place?

I'm not buying into a narrative, I'm telling you what I've observed over many years. Typically in quite "right-on", progressive workplaces which think they have it all sussed. I wonder what makes you so confident that racism and inequality doesn't exist?

I detest them too and I'd like to avoid them like the plague. Unfortunately for me, people employing folks on skin colour and name are the owners of industries and trying to avoid them would make my employment opportunities miniscule.

It sounds like the scheme doesn't require DS to have actively been discriminated against or disadvantaged to apply, just that he's of black heritage, which he is. I'd encourage him to apply and then it's up to the scheme organisers/ employers to decide if they want him.
Arguably for better diversity in the workplace his background as a mixed race young person who may not obviously appear to be so is as important to have in the mix, because his lived experience will be different than a young person who is more visibly mixed race or black. Same reasons that disabilities don't have to be visible for people to apply for schemes to help level the playing field there too.
It's embarrassing that posters are pretending that discrimination doesn't happen just because the law says it shouldn't. If that was the case then Pregnant And Screwed could happily shut up shop and BLM would have nothing to protest about. These days it's obviously not the outright 'no dogs, no blacks, no Irish' approach but might be a more subtle someone else was 'a better fit for the company'.

The evidence lies in the under representation of people who are not white in the sector operating the scheme. Unless you believe that white people are innately more intelligent, capable, hard working etc than POC, so are over represented in these sectors on their merit alone, then it follows there's other factors at play that results in the under representation. The schemes aim to address these other factors.