The woke roll back continues

[Hoardasurass]

Jack Daniels has ditched all it's woke policies and it's lgbtq equality index membership

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/08/22/jack-daniels-owner-scraps-diversity-targets-amid-anti-woke/

The issue with DEI as the likes of Jack Daniels has been doing it is completely focused towards lgbtqi with the emphasis on tq so if you employ a middle aged white male who claims to be a transwoman and a lesbian extra brownie points so you've ticked off trans, a woman and lesbian so wonderful for your diversity figures but shit for reality because they are still employing a middle aged white male.

The current dei for these companies needs tearing up and rewriting with the actual spirit of the law at its heart.

I'm not convinced that it's generally the responsibility of employers to make up for the kinds of things that mean there are barriers in some types of work - things like early education, for example. But also, not all disparities in numbers are related to some kind of discrimination.

I also think it's not actually all that necessary that all work sectors reflect social demographics. If there are a lot of white plumbers, but not many Asian plumbers, so long as there is nothing keeping anyone out of plumbing, what's the issue? Someculturs are less likely to encourage their kids into trades, and some put a lot of emphasis on university.

Mentoring is important as progression often results from knowing how the system works, understanding the nuances of work place culture which isn't taught in school and is often the preserve of white males. It helps level the playing field. And there is intersectionality between race and poverty etc. A Black person - even a privately educated one - is unlikely to achieve the same heights as an equivalently educated White person in the UK and that is due to systemic issues. The gender pay gap is another example. So whilst there are some tokenistic examples, the reality is equity remains out of reach and policies are required to enable all of society, not just some to maximise potential. It makes business sense for companies and for society
And women celebrating what is going on is an own goal

A simple example is the NHS. Those from non-White Backgrounds make up almost 50% of nurses and midwives at Band 5 level and only 9% at Band 8 and above. And this disparity has been there for decades. The country is paying for this - as these nurses move to other jurisdictions without such baked in racism in the system and the NHS pays ridiculous amounts for agency staff/bank rates etc. Direct result: £180 billion NHS budget does not touch the sides of the needs of the population. The cost of racism to the NHS is estimated at £2.3billion. We are now at a point the service cannot afford to fund innovative treatments such as the recent dementia drug and others in the pipeline.

Yet, we are celebrating instead of pushing for better policies to address and deliver equity

No one should be hired to fulfill a quota and that is not what DEI policies should be about. It should really be about true meritocracy. The best for the job regardless of identity, being part of the club etc. And you need policies to help those who lead organisations to think out of the box about what that looks like and also to enable them to nurture all talent within the company - not just talent that fits their expectation of where talent usually resides.

Because most are being implemented and written in a way that means your staff body is actually less representative of wider society and less diverse.
As we've seen so many times on these boards, these kinds of policies tend to have a heavy slant towards supporting highly privileged spicy straights to the detriment of others, with minority and disabled women taking the biggest hits
It's not actually inclusive or diverse if the people who actually need it are losing out.
I'd like to see genuine efforts by companies to employ and support diverse candidates. Right now that starts with scrapping policies that do the opposite of what they say on the tin.

So they’re a box ticking exercise rather than providing actual opportunities? I can understand that argument. I don’t agree with the meritocracy argument I.e. the best people are no longer getting picked for jobs. They never have done so it can’t be blamed on this alone. I think the OP lost a few people by using the word “woke”. It really does dumb down every argument regardless of how convincing it may be.

The issue is that most DEI initiatives never focus on disabled people, there tends to be one characteristic focussed on and the other 8 are ignored.

This was a really helpful example thank you.

We're all discussing DEI as though it is the most important thing in business. DEI rose up the ranks due to an up-swell of continued concern about inequality. The emotional contest was worthy but many of the ideas were ill thought out numbers games which always begs the question about what's behind the stats. There has been too little research, too much emotion, which has brought about more division than I can ever recall. Too man institutions are failing because a client focus has become submerged in the muddle of the continuing complexities of DEI - we no longer get a bang for our buck (did we ever).

Business isn't the playground of ideology, business is about making money to support a capitalist system, which, with all it's inequalities, seems to have done more to support equality than any other system I can think of. Lots of businesses are realising that stepping into DEI has had more negatives than positives for them and the cost. Many jobs in DEI go to the very people who have the most privilege.

Businesses are going back to work before the West's decline is unstoppable perhaps, but these are only one or two business whose client base is distinctly non-'woke'. The pendulum usually settles somewhere in the middle

I agree with PPs who have said that this is a result of DEI initiatives focussing on trans/queer issues to the detriment of other marginalised groups. There have been posts on here bemoaning the fact that DEI training has solely been about trans/misgendering/pronouns and other characteristics have been ignored. The pendulum swung too far for some groups only.

Many jobs in DEI go to the very people who have the most privilege.

That is the truth and those who hold the roles have no interest in proper well thought out DEI it is just a performance and a lucrative one at that.

@Combattingthemoaners

Regarding your examples. Plumbers = yes, more women would be brilliant, I imagine it’s white dominated too. White males don’t pop out the womb being excellent plumbers. Teachers = yes, especially primary. It would be great if it wasn’t seen as a female. This said, although teaching is female dominated guess who tends to dominate senior leadership positions? The Premier League = how many black managers or owners do you see? You can’t just pick one job role out and say it’s really reflective.

I am all for the best person getting the job but it simply wouldn’t happen regardless of D&I policies because we do not live in a fair society. We never have."

I think this response highlights three key dangers of the far left woke agenda:

1. There is a tendency of the woke left whenever there is a high proportion of males (or even worse white working class males) in any particular role / job then to attribute that to structural sexism/ racism etc. However if there is a role / job with a high proportion of female or ethnic minorities then this is ignored.

2. The drive for making the workplace reflective of the societal mix only relates to high profile/ income jobs for example politicians or CEOs etc.
   Law is a really good example. The majority of newly qualified solicitors are female, yet the majority of senior partners are male. Now the hard left woke will immediately attribute this as evidence of institutional sexism. From what I have seen first hand the reason tends to be that educated high earning female solicitors tend to marry educated high earning men. Then children come along and to become senior partners requires seriously long hours (the clients demand it and if they don't get it they'll go elsewhere) - which becomes incompatible with having children especially younger children. Also at that level of income you start paying close to 60% tax. So what happens is that one of the couple voluntarily chooses (usually the female) not to go for senior partner or reduces their hours. This is not institutional sexism but just that a large number of female lawyers don't want to be working 80 hour weeks when they have young children. The question of course is why proportionally more male lawyers are willing to work 80 hour weeks when they have young children.

3. This post also exposes the hard left woke agenda to create a societally reflective workplace even if that comes against the freedom of choice for the individuals. Taking the case of the plumbers. Whilst no one is born being an excellent plumber, a greater number of boys than girls wish to become plumbers. There is no institutional sexism preventing females becoming plumbers, in fact it is a lot easier to become a plumber if you are female than male. Similarly there are no institutional barriers against males becoming primary school teachers, indeed many schools want more male teachers, it's just that more males choose not to become primary school teachers.
   The woke hard left want to take away this freedom of choice through DEI quotas.

"I'm not convinced that it's generally the responsibility of employers to make up for the kinds of things that mean there are barriers in some types of work - things like early education, for example. But also, not all disparities in numbers are related to some kind of discrimination"

There is loads of untapped talent in relation to people who could be brilliant in a role but don't get a look in due to mediocre people appearing better due to the opportunities they have had that the more talented people haven't.

EDI initiatives should focus on finding and developing these people. It will be good for business and society.

I think that class and do io economic statistics are the ultimate barriers. I know moderately bright disabled and black people from wealthy families who have done much better than their poorer counterparts who are brighter.

Great post @1dayatatime , the woke left are the biggest danger to society of our times.

What exactly do you mean by the staff body reflects wider society.?

For example 82% of the people in England and Wales are white, taking your statement at face value that would equate to the staff body of all companies/institutions/businesses being 82% white employees.

A previous poster mentioned the number and percentage of black professional footballers, are you arguing that those numbers should be reduced to better reflect wider society?

A previous poster mentioned the number and percentage of black professional footballers, are you arguing that those numbers should be reduced to better reflect wider society?

It's this kind of deliberate disingenuous nonsense that makes so many people not take FWR seriously.

And why is it disingenuous nonsense? The poster claimed the staff body should reflect wider society and when it doesn't then what? The professional footballer example is pertinent does it reflect wider society? What is the solution if it does not?

@Appledoughnut

"33% of junior doctors and 32% of consultants in the UK's National Health Service (NHS) were Asian in 2022, yet only 5% are black "

Should this be addressed as well?

The transphobic mind-rot is so bad that some GC people are celebrating the end of one of the most successful systems for ensuring fair representation and equal opportunity, on the off-chance that transgender people might benefit.

@Appledoughnut

Black swimmers are underrepresented in the Olympics. In 2019, Swim England reported that only 1% of its 73,000 competitive swimmers identified as Black or mixed race.

However there hasn't been a white Olympic 100 metre sprint medal winner since 1980.

Is this institutional racism as well ?

What rot.

There is nuance to this. The population of Black people in the UK is approximately 4-5%. But then you need to look at what proportion go to grammar school, apply to medical school, immigrate to the UK as doctors. Asian families in the UK are more likely to understand the grammar system, value academics and apply to medical school - so they are overrepresented (12-15% of the general population).

There is data that shows people from non-White Backgrounds are more likely to fail post-graduate medical exams and Colleges are looking at systemic reasons why that is. This is despite having high entry scores into the profession.

The point isn't about colour. It is that we need to have a society where people's potential are maximised irrespective of colour, background etc. And addressing barriers to that. Simple stats are the beginning but then doubling down on the detail and identifying the barriers and then crafting solutions that ensure the cream rises to the top regardless of background is what DEI should be about

I have worked and been a patient at various London hospitals and IME the ethnicity of staff has been very much a reflection of the local population at all grades. One thing has always been very noticeable though and that is that male nurses always rise through the ranks very quickly often into very senior roles. I spend a LOT of time in hospital, in many different departments.

"For example 82% of the people in England and Wales are white, taking your statement at face value that would equate to the staff body of all companies/institutions/businesses being 82% white employees."

I occasionally work for an NHS trust who use the term 'marginalised people from the global majority' rather than 'ethnic minority'.

In a recent publication they were pointing out that 'sadly' only X% of a professional group came from 'the global majority'. This percentage was higher than the percentage of ethnic minority people in the UK population. THIS is the kind of batshittery that leads compassionate, liberal people to start to attend to phrases like the 'woke mind virus'.

My career has been dedicated to supporting marginalised people and facilitating greater levels of social inclusion. The people who are ready to dismiss me as a bigot for questioning some DEI ideas (mostly those underpinned by critical theory) are proving to be a much bigger threat to what I am trying to achieve than the actual bigots I have encountered over the years.

The actual bigots tend to have deep seated anxiety and insecurity driving their behaviour. Those suggesting I am bigoted tend to be people seeking a quick fix to affirm their identity as a virtuous defender of the vulnerable.