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 remember an article where all the private school kids (who were talented) ended up going to HYMPS instead.

If you really care about removing racial biases remove the names and don't report gender when doing the CV screening (that is fair)

But don't just select people based on their ethnicity to fill some blanket quota.

See the CV. See what uni they went to, school, grade, work experience. But don't see any useless markers (ethnicity, gender etc) that can cause unconscious biases

I remember a thread here a few years back about uni blind recruitment.

Some large desirable employers went for uni blind recruitment to give a chance to groups which could struggle to get to good unis and so they admitted based on assessment centers and panel interviews.

One poster was in bits - her ethnic low SEC son got contextual Oxbridge offer and she was agonising that his Oxbridge diploma wouldn't give him advantage over those pesky kids who went to bog standard Russel unis.

The 2023 one with a Cambridge student?

Do you not think that on average the Cambridge, LSE, and Imperial student has completed a more rigorous degree and is of a higher calibre to a graduate of Nottingham, Southampton and Bristol etc.?

@MarcoRubio maybe it was Cambridge, def Oxbridge.

I agree that Oxbridge, LSE and Imperial require more effort then Nottingham, Southampton and Bristol.

My point is different though - when white middle class kids (god forbid privately educated) miss out on offers to the former because of positive discrimination and end up at latter unis, these kids don't automatically lose their IQ, soft skills, drive and attitude. So blind recruitment, incl uni blind, gives them another chance.

That poster was in bits because her son would lose his Oxbridge, SEC and race advantage and would need to compete for a job just like everyone else. There was no way to convince her that if he's the brightest and the best to get to Oxbridge, he'd still be the brightest and the best to get the job.

I strongly believe that the only way to end up all this mess and resentment is for larger and prestigious employers to introduce blind recruitment based on assessment centers and panel interviews. So CVs selected based on skills and experience, no name/age/ethnic/school/uni info. Then those who passed CV stage go through identical exercises assessed by panel. This might be a bit trickier for mid career recruitment, but for grads this should be the only way.

The uni is totally relevant though. A first in maths at Oxford is worth 100 x a first in maths from Greenwich.

Great news! The BoE has OTHER schemes targeted to people with lower economic status! Lower SE status white people can apply through these routes. Spread the word!
We don't want lower SE status people voting for a party that will take away welfare support, the NHS and the EA all because no one chose to read up on ALL of the BoE diversity schemes and spread the misinformation white people were being left out. Do we?

Like don't remove what university they went to. At least not for the pre-screen. It is valid. It should be taken in wholly with interview performance as well. If there are many people who do well, who will your turn to?

A university degree is a valid signal to the labour market.

I don't dispute that. (Is there Greenwich uni? )

Now let's take two A-level kids. One diversity and one white middle class boy, let's add private school to the mix. They apply to Oxbridge with roughly similar grades. Who gets the offer? right, diversity one. Their skills and potential might be equal, PS boy might even get some edge, but he won't get the place, so end up in 2nd tier uni. Blind, incl uni blind recruitment allow them to compete again and level the field.

And this shouldn't be taken as a threat - if that Oxbridge grad is the best, then it's a walk in the park for him to win assessment and interview against Greenwich grad.

And no talk about diversity hires either.

link please?

It's not just about graduates.

It's about anyone either looking for a starting career position after college or sixth form. In fact, even jobs for more experienced candidates are discriminating.

Lots of companies use AI to sort through cv's. They don't need to be blind. You can just tell AI to ignore x .

The days of a real live person going through 1000 cv,s have been over For quite a while. Bias is bias, whether its against poc or white people.

Is it just young people being forced into this social experiment? There are very few jobs around anyway. It's ridiculous it's not enough to get good grades.

It's not just young people either. I have also found senior professional roles welcoming applicants only from minority backgrounds etc. I welcome them saying they don't have a white old boys club and anyone can apply. Well, not quite anyone.

Do people not think unconscious bias exists? I think it does. I think I'm biased against groups, it would be remiss of me not to admit it.

Yep, it's the people who say things like 'I don't see colour' or 'I don't care if you're black, brown, blue, purple or yellow' that worry me.

But how would you suggest addressing it? Because it’s daft to say that a company has to have a certain gender balance or ethnicity balance in a lot of situations. If a construction company thinks they should have brickies 50/50 male and female they’re not going to get anywhere as women aren’t interested in training. Or the Bank of England grad scheme demanding a set number of women / BAME hires if the vast majority of people studying the relevant degree is white men.

Just look at the number of kids now affected by the corporates and government departments discriminating against them. This is an entirely new (in the last 10/15 years) and manufactured issue so obviously it’s getting as it didn’t happen before.

It will clearly be under reported because you can see the reaction elicited for even discussing it. Accusations of ‘right wing race baiting’ etc. even on here. So many people clearly invested in denying it is happening, ignoring it waving away the examples given. It’s quite obvious really.

I haven’t assumed anything. I know there are people are quite invested in arguing in favour of discrimination against Caucasian people for personal reasons.

As a POC myself I see no need for DEI silliness

No one has argued for discrimination against Caucasian people. That’s absurd.

This smacks of ‘I’m alright, Jack’.

That's what I'm asking really. Where are the numbers? Because the only numbers I can find are that 5% of white people, 67% of Asian people and 76% of black people reported they had experienced discrimination at work.
I'm very happy to discuss any new information or evidence that supports your assertion that this has swung the other way. But, it's not unreasonable to want more than "just look at..." without providing anything TO look at.
Unevidenced speculation that supports your position (that white people under report) while simultaneously speculating the opposite about POC ( that they over report or only 'percieve') which i know you didnt personally say, but im probably reasonable to think you agree with, given you don't believe POC experience barriers; isnt conducive to open discussion because it starts from a position of bias.
I understand people don't like the idea of schemes targeted to POC. That couldn't be plainer. However to have the conversation you say you want, it's as important that you remain as open to the idea that white people as a group are not actually suffering detriment as you expect others to be to your claims they are.
At the moment we have figures to suggest that discrimination against POC is a serious problem, and that this isn't the case for white people. Unless you have different figures, it's going to be hard to convince anyone unless you're preaching to the choir.

I have been passed over for promotion and other things that I think are unfair during my working life, but as a white middle class person etc I have never thought it’s anything to do with my identity more that the decision maker has a grudge against me for some inexplicable reason. How do POCs know that the unfairness is because of their racial identity and not like in my situation that some decision makers are just idiots?

As a woman, if I'm treated disfavourably by a man at work, how do I know if he just doesnt like me personally, or its because I'm a woman and he's sexist?
Well firstly, there's patterns of behavioural clues. Language used, attitudes expressed, tone used. Absence of any other reason for the behaviour. Then there's the comparator. Does he treat men the same way? Does he treat other women the same way? If thats a no followed by a yes, then there's a strong indicator its sexism rather than a problem with me generally.
Same with identifying racism.

That's exactly the point.

@5128gap is likely to be referring to Migrants and discrimination in the UK - Migration Observatory

but the data here is based on self reported, means perceived, discrimination.

I've seen it more than once - internal vacancy opens up, 5-6 applicants, a few white, one black. After rounds of interviews white person gets the job. Black one starts talking about racial discrimination instantly. If opposite, and it's black person gets a job, no white candidate will ever raise an issue.

even if it’s unfair it’s no more or less unfair than it’s been for people from global majority backgrounds for years and the balance has to redress somewhere. unlucky for your son but since unconscious bias still exists in spades in banking and consulting etc i’m sure he’ll still find his way.

like the aussie pp, extremely interested in the roles you say your son found which explicitly ban applicants who aren’t from global majority backgrounds etc.