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

[reallyreallycrazy]

Slight hyperbole but not far off.

Yes, of course I suppose my DS should be appreciative of his 'white privilege' (I do detest the term though), but he's been applying to over 100 x spring & summer internships and apprenticeships.

Invariably, he finds that lots of programmes are only open to black/female/social mobility/ND candidates. In one recent case - a global consultancy - there were NO openings for anyone outside of these categories.

And today, on LinkedIn, he forwarded me several links from leading banks reaching out about apprenticeships etc. In most photos, you might be lucky to spot 1-2 white males and in the video of one, there were not a single white male (or female for that matter).

I get that these firms need to do outreach to disadvantaged groups but if you look at the population level percentage of the various group categories, this really has swung too far the other way.

I get that many of these organisations have years to catch up with diversity hires but to try to rebalance in such an aggressive way and in a short space of time, makes it very difficult for young, white males (unless they have qualified for 'free school meals') to get a foot in the door which is especially tough in an incredibly tough grad market as it is.

I’m not sure large employers do take much notice of connections via family. However some do. BBC and journalism definitely. The sons and daughters of famous people get a very good leg up! However in many companies it’s not this easy.

It’s definitely poor white boys who achieve less in schools. They are probably the least represented. Many immigrant families see education as being very important in order to escape poverty. The Brits just moan about it!

FSM? You can come from a working class family ( poor in your words) and not qualify for those. Think its only the unemployed that gets them. Not general low earning families

Edit. Just looked and you need an income of 7400 or less a year to qualify. That's less than 16 hours on minimum wage. Yet for full uni funding the household income has to be about £25k. And those getting full funding are considered low income families

Well, whatever you’ve heard is not true. I work in grad recruitment for a global investment bank, & have worked in more than 1, and whilst we make sure programmes are in place, and there’s a diverse slate, the reality is that it’s actually quite a balanced outcome. It is hugely competitive and the banks, especially investment banks are not in the habit of hiring people unless they’re pretty sure they’re the best hires they can possibly make. And sometimes that is not the white male!

@RubySquid Er? No. See attached. It’s not that difficult. Dsis did by working part time as a single parent. Dad of three dc just around the corner but they didn’t marry.

I was a working single parent and didn't get FSM

Oh knock it off OP. What shite.

Child tax credit has slowly been replaced by universal credit for years now, barely anyone left claiming child tax credit.

That said, what employers are asking about how low earning your parents were? Is this a new thing? It was always just ethnicity and sexuality when I was job hunting three years ago

Rather than blaming diversity hiring practices, think about what your son can do to improve his chances.

Those with some paid work history that draws out transferable skills, or relevant volunteering, stand out more when, as a hiring manager, you are faced with reviewing 100 CVs.

It’s tough at the moment for most young people entering the job market, so I do empathise with anyone trying to keep their young people motivated.

I continue to find it shocking, the degree to which people think this phrase somehow justifies the most base examples of direct discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics.

Coming from a WC family would not be 'poor in my words'. I would use the word poor to refer to people living below the poverty line. Many WC people do not live below the PL and class and financial means though often linked, are not the same thing. Most people who live below the PL (the definition of poor) would be entitled to FSM.
However I do agree eligibility for FSM is not a fool proof way to capture all people disadvantaged by wealth inequality. But it's a difficult one to measure as there are flaws to most options, and it's better than nothing.

I work for a Bank, totally agree with all of this. Same here.

I mean - the social contract in this case is the idea that discrimination on the basis of things like race is not ok, that it's very much the opposite of ok.

I think people understand that fundamentally, when you have a lot of very qualified candidates, it ends up being some really intangible things that are in play with final decisions about hiring that can vary a lot depending on all kinds of things that have nothing to do with some kind of objective "best". One candidate happens to have a second language that is spoken by a large client. One has some extra tech skills that are lacking in the team. One seems like she will be able to get along with another brilliant, but grumpy, employee.

But what we are not supposed to be including in those intangibles is race, sex, etc. even, in most cases, when it might count as an intangible - the law and the social contract has been that these things can only be considered under the condition that they are somehow fundamental to the role.

So year, why wouldn't people be pissed off, upset, object on principle, when suddenly some people want to change that understanding?

I just don’t understand why you think blind hiring is the holy grail.

Comparing a black student from inner city London with ABB and a white privately educated student with AAA blindly will make you think the AAA student is better. This fails to see that in spite of all the disadvantage, the black student still achieved such fantastic grades.

We are trying to raise the floor, not lower the ceiling.

I have to laugh at the white middle class displeasure in this or I’ll just get angry at the lack of research and critical thinking skills.

The Op was specifically referring to Internships which could lead to grad jobs. Many well qualified students can't apply because they are not considered DEI. So the door is shut and they have no chance of competing.

This is what has changed and I don't think it's positive. It must be demoralising and divisive when you have 2 students on the same course, same Uni, same ability. One can apply for internships, the other can't because of their skin colour. It seems bizarre to me. Rishi would have got a helping hand over a white person from a relatively poor family.

I don't agree that skin colour is a basis for pre screening anyone. The reason men are more predominant in finance (if the HR team looked around) is because the hours are punishing and many women, myself included choose to opt for a different lifestyle, especially as I considered a family. Not everything is racism/sexism as many of my female cohort left before aged 30

I work in a highly diverse environment. No one cares about your skin colour and we certainly don't screen for skin colour before reviewing a CV. Isn't that how it should also be?

Out of interest then what is the poverty line income.Under £7400? As that's the FSM level

Why are you assuming it's all white middle class?? Majority of white people in the UK are not middle class..what about white Europeans?

Universities now routinely select students with lower grades. It's fairly usual for even the most prestigious unis to take students who achieve AAB grades, which is many grades below the top grades.

Once in Uni they have access to the same application process and help. The Op was discussing internships so the playing field is level given assessments are online and rarely Infront of a human until the very final stages. They test students on subject matter, so if you are a Maths undergrad you will be assessed on your mathematical thinking. If computer science you will be tested on programming and computational thinking.

Great candidates will get through since they are all attending the same lectures, being taught the same, so no need for DEI once at Uni.

The laws against delivering jobs to people based on their race came about because people thought that was wrong, not because they liked it.

Refusing to hire someone because your customers don't like their race is immoral. Society has been pretty big on this idea for some decades now. I am not sure why suddenly, over the last few years, people are shocked by this idea.

So 80% not diversity hires.

PL income changes in the amount as its relative, it means having an income below 60% of the national median. You can google for the current figure if youre interested, but i think around £20k.
I think you've misunderstood the criteria for FSM eligibility. The £7400 isn't the total household income ceiling for eligibility. It's the ceiling for the amount of earned income you can have if your eligibility for FSM is based on being a UC claimant. People in this category would have their UC as well as the £7400 they earned.

Out of interest @RubySquid 31% of children in the UK are classed as living in poverty. 25% of children are eligible for FSM. If we take into account the children living in poverty who are not yet school age so don't appear on the FSM stats, it does appear that poverty and FSM are sufficiently linked to use entitlement as an indicator of poverty, in the absence of a better measure.

So 80% not diversity hires

I havent checked the stats on the spreadsheet but seems significantly more that 20% for internships. I object to any blocking at the application process - once you specify a criteria then it should be up for debate...why not white Romanians from deprived areas? Are they less deserving than black middle class women?

It's increasingly not the case in the Us, either. There is now a significant black middle class in the US, where the families have been MC for two, three, or sometimes 4 generations.They don't have any greater connection to their poor ancestors than I do to my grandfather who came from a Glasgow slum.

And there are now increasing demographics of black immigrants who are a totally differernt kettle of fish. Caribbean immigrants have always done well in North America - my own doctor growing up in the 70s was Trinidadian. And they are being joined now by Africans - Nigerians are one of the most successful groups, in terms of income and educational achievements, in the whole of the USA.

The old assumptions about race being a reliable class signifier in the US don't really hold any more.

I've heard some banks saying they want 20% diversity hires which is an awfully high number given the fabric of the population.

Eh? Almost 4% of the population are black, 3% mixed race and over 8% asian. Thats 15%. Thats the population as a whole but actually the rates are higher in younger age groups. Hiring 20% diversity probably just about gets to hiring candidates representative of the population when you factor in disability & other diversity factors.

Are you saying that discriminating against people in the past justifies discriminating against other people now?

People are not talking about randomly blaming anyone just because their child did not get a job. They are saying that companies are openly choosing candidates based on race, including formalised schemes to do make such selections.

And yes, lots of people who are not white have complained that they have been cut out of employment, education, and so on. And they have been listened to, it's now illegal and socially unacceptable.

If a white person’s son doesn’t get on an incredibly competitive grad scheme, because that grad scheme doesn’t hire white people, at all, then it’s not competitive is it?

No white person/company would ‘get away’ with advertising roles purely for ‘white working class boys’ would they?