To think being prejudiced against the privately educated is OK

[EastLondonObserver]

I have spent 25 years working in the advertising industry at some of the most highly regarded agencies in the world. Most of these have been dominated (in certain roles, at least) by the privately educated who gained their entry to the industry through having personal/family contacts in it, were subbed by rich parents while working in low-paid or free internships to gain experience and had that empty confidence private schools instil.

Perfectly capable graduates educated comprehensive schools didn't get much of a look in. However a few managed to break through, including myself.

Consequently, throughout my career I have actively rejected almost all privately educated graduates applying for entry level positions. This runs into hundreds of applicants. I have managed to do this without being called out. Sometimes I have rejected them even when they clearly would have done a better job than a comprehensive school educated alternative. These were corporate companies - it made no meaningful difference to me if they were mildly less successful as a consequence. The only exception was one graduate educated at Harrow and Bristol. I gave him the job as an experiment. He was average at best.

I did this in the name of social justice: re-distributing opportunities away from those with unearned privilege.

Have I been unreasonable? Has anyone else done the same?

The way to counter that is to hire on blind basis, which many companies will be doing already.

@MmeArnault Re 'European' education, your description of the 'European system' couldn't be more wrong for the Netherlands. And in any case, before Brexit, it was perfectly possible for a British state-school pupil at a UK university (aka my niece) to infiltrate the elite training establishments (which certainly do exist in France) and become a Euro bureaucrat. The Netherlands is totally different although not without elites (eg university corps) but the Dutch Government looks pretty representative of a (small c) conservative country with significant international/immigration numbers. But am absolutely astonished that people seem equate not going to private school as being 'disadvantaged'. OP's actions seem to me to be about adjusting representation. It's not healthy (as we can see in the present Government) that a tiny proportion of society takes all the key jobs and it's a total waste of talent.

Possibly. We've had 'blind' recruitment in my place (essentially software that strips out all interesting and noteworthy facts about the candidates - I'm parodying , but only slightly). I've found it's not worked that well, and recruiters who aren't coming at things from a biased position and just want to make good hires find it hinders them. And in any case it's usually easy to tell what kind of background someone's from at the interview stage.

I can completely see how it could help in somewhere like the OP's place. But those kinds of businesses are, unfortunately, also those least likely to implement it: why would they, if you can't tell from the stripped-back CV who their parents are?

I appreciate we all have different experiences, and the pp who worked in PR I get as it’s a bit like publishing in that it attracts posh females.

But creative agencies I’ve worked at are just young, mostly white but a fairly mixed bunch when it comes to backgrounds. Ageism is a big issue though - hardly any 50 plus females and a tendency to think others are old at 40. That I do dislike, unfair for women (although last place I worked had a female global CEO and was more female top heavy than any other place I’d been which was good, still not without other issues for employees though).

Gosh you do like your Latin don’t you?

Are you sure you didn’t go to private school?!

Can you imagine that there might be other reasons for parents choosing a great education for their children?
Don't go suggesting parents make educational decisions based on several factors. It causes some problems for people with chips on their shoulders and who want to reduce complex social inequality down to where someone's parent chose to educate them.

When so many posters seem to think challenging unethical recruitment methods with being privately educated, being privileged, wanting to buy your child a place at the front of a queue for certain industries, nuance and complexity left the room a long time ago.

Then again, years ago I would probably have said the same sort of things, but after a career working with children and young people from a range of backgrounds and seeing the complexity in action every day, I've changed my mind. People who are obsessed with being right and giving themselves a pat on the back aren't actually interested in complexity or social inequality.

"Consequently, throughout my career I have actively rejected almost all privately educated graduates applying for entry level positions"

I'm curious about this statement. Does this mean whenever a CV lands on your desk the first thing you do is Google the applicant's school to check if it's private?

Can you imagine that there might be other reasons for parents choosing a great education for their children?
Don't go suggesting parents make educational decisions based on several factors. It causes some problems for people with chips on their shoulders and who want to reduce complex social inequality down to where someone's parent chose to educate them.

Then again, years ago I would probably have said the same sort of things, but after a career working with children and young people from a range of backgrounds and seeing the complexity in action every day, I've changed my mind. People who are obsessed with being right and giving themselves a pat on the back aren't actually interested in complexity or social inequality.

The reverse is true at universities - there have been issues with students who have been supported and spoon fed struggling at university with self directed study. Bourne out anecdotally by family member who is a personal tutor at an Oxford college and tears her hair out at the minority of students who soak up all her time for this reason.

I never claimed to describe a European-wide school system, there is no such thing - outside of @EastLondonObserver 's mind. I was talking about some leading counties in Europe whose education systems I am familiar with.

I know, and love the NL education model, I had friends there growing up and they now have children, my son is at UVA. The NL system is practically perfect, its aspirations and outcomes are spot on imo. It's still an exception.

You say it was perfectly possible for someone state educated in Britain to infiltrate into Eurocratie before Brexit, I have no reason to disbelieve you, but how does it link with education in Europe?
Before Tony it was perfectly possible for state school children to have a very good state-subsidised university education in this country, with reasonable outcomes and no debts before they'd even started their first job. We all know that social mobility has been regressing dramatically in recent years. See? no link either.

I wouldn't ever claim that PS educated children are disadvantaged. If they are, as a group, it's in the same proportions than any other children in the UK if you're talking about emotional circumstances and significantly less disadvantaged if it's financial and cultural circumstances. (do I need to provide data for this @EastLondonObserver 😉)

OP's actions, as he's proven post after post, are ego lead and not born out of compassion for anyone. I don't begrudge him redressing the balance wherever he can, I just don't like his methods, even less his superiority complex. If he is such a big shot it shouldn't be a problem to announce his colours to his bosses, to start with, and to have a little line in his jobs descriptions saying he will prioritise minorities and state educated candidates. What's the problem?
On the whole I am just grateful he is just one less, hum, person my kids will have to deal with.
There's also the small matter of the good candidates he rejects going on to work for his competitors, but as he says, he's not bothered.

I agree that it's ridiculous that our governments are generation after generation, stuffed to the gills with people who have no idea how the world works and do very well for themselves whilst ruining everything for everyone else.

One thing they fail to fix, or are not willing to, is the waste of talents that starts in schools. I employ three kids at work that are doing just fine, they are -obviously- just as naturally bright as anyone who's been to PS. Their CVs and interview skills were so bad, they have no qualifications, failed A levels, very poor GCSCs, their grammar is atrocious and worst of all, they have been TOLD at school that they'd better expect very little out of life. Yes, really. They couldn't believe we were willing to train them and offer them a jobs at the end, how sad is that? They are kids, they've barely started at life for goodness' sake, what sort of education is this? This is not a particularly deprived area.
We have a school system that is unfit for purpose, snuffing out the amazing potential of millions of children, failing most of them and yet, is happily tolerated. I guess it's all the PS's fault.
I couldn't be less impressed by the OP's coming on MN to self glorify about his plaster sticking.

@EastLondonObserver If you only read one reply, then it should be this one.

YAB beyond U.

Hugo and Jasmine don't actually exist, you know.

You can't commit a 'personal attack' against an invented character.

Oh LOL.

@thedancingbear

You understand - or at least I hope you do - what I was alluding to.

Hint, in case you need it - it's ugly stereotyping.

I do think the phrase ‘chip on her shoulder’ shows a certain very smug and unpleasant mindset. It’s a bit like the insult ‘Karen’ used to stop women, particularly middle-aged women, from complaining about anything ever, however much it’s justified.
The accusation of having a chip on your shoulder is an attempt to keep approximately 95 per cent of the population in our place.

Absolutely agree NoName. Anyone that uses phase has lost their argument in my mind. It’s a real shut down. Closely followed by accusations of jealousy 🙄.

I have also been really disappointed in the low aspirations “not for the likes of us” attitude of some of my dds state school peers. That can be fixed by parenting as well as school but often sadly doesn’t even occur to capable kids to put themselves forward.

Remember my friend being adamant she was going to leave school at 16 to work in a bank like her sister had. Fortunately the teachers were able to persuade her to stay on she got As and Bs at A level and a 2:1 degree from a RG university and got into HSBC on a graduate training scheme. Left to her own devices she wouldn’t have done any of that but she was very able.

I do think the phrase ‘chip on her shoulder’ shows a certain very smug and unpleasant mindset.

How else can the op's attitude and actions be described?

The op is putting his/her own agenda first and potentially working against the best interest of the company that employs and pays her/him!

That is the definition of 'having a chip on your shoulder' - have an angry or unpleasant attitude or way of behaving caused by a belief that one has been treated unfairly in the past!

Sorry @EastLondonObserver I missed that, was it for me?
No you don't tend to engage with anyone who has views different to yours or who can point out the shallowness of your arguments, do you? Maybe that is the source of your dislike for people better educated than you.
The evidence for what I said is widely available, from reputable sources, don't be so lazy, go educate yourself. Or not.

Maybe that is the source of your dislike for people better educated than you.

So people who went to private school must be better educated that the OP? Careful, your prejudice is slipping out while you berate the OP for hers.

It looks like the OP has finally gone off to do some work bin some more CV's

I couldn’t agree more. It’s a lazy, snobbish conceit dished out in a weak attempt to silence dissent.

I though private schools are encouraged activities such as debating. You would think those who have attended them could formulate a more effective argument.

Still here!

You've two candidates who have identical qualifications, except one of those has had a massive leg up through the private education system. The other has achieved the same with far less help.

How.Do.You.Know.This?????????

Lazy, lazy, lazy thinking.

Thanks. I think it can be difficult if you don’t have the social capital.
Looking back, my teachers were fairly hands off and unambitious for their pupils. Teachers seem so weighed down now that probably hasn’t changed in a lot of cases.

@MmeArnault I'm not sure that anyone in NL would consider the education system 'practically perfect' but it continues to evolve. By far the
most significant factor is that everyone is in it together - there's no parallel universe of paid-for education: the UK is truly toxic in that regard. 93.6% of English schoolchildren are NOT at private schools. Those who benefit from scholarships or bursaries who come from modest backgrounds will STILL be hugely more likely to get prestigious jobs because of that private school education. PPE at Oxford? The degree that runs Britain (see article in Guardian). The personal attacks on OP seem way OTT - they are practising a bit of subversive selection to enable more visibility for non-private school kids. My issue would be that they would be less able to do the job than someone privately educated but bright, motivated and ambitious state school educated would be the premium candidate, if I was an employer. And yes I would look at those first.

@MmArnault "We have a school system that is unfit for purpose, snuffing out the amazing potential of millions of children, failing most of them and yet, is happily tolerated."

I completely agree. It's a scandal.

Yes exactly, I wondered at the OP's encyclopaedic knowledge of the funding basis of every school in the country.