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?

yanbu. Even with blind hiring the system is so badly stacked against the less privileged. I’m sure there are enough people out there who hire privately educated people - they’ll be just fine.

also to those people who say “hire on merit” - there is no such thing as a meritocracy whilst there is inherent bias in the world against women, minorities, the poor, people with disabilities, people who aren’t straight etc. meritocracy as a hiring system has been proven to benefit straight white men. Read invisible women for reference.

On the flip side though, it wouldn't matter to my DC if you didn't employ them due to their parents choice of school, (which is obviously out of their control) thankfully because of the choice we made with their schooling they already have so many doors open to them, so wouldn't exactly be hard pushed to find a job.

kind of the OP’s point really

thank you for the reassurance (and a reminder of how awful Carter USM were :) )

YABVU.

Recruitment should be about following appropriate HR procedures and a proper vetting approach, not someone's political views. What you're doing is unprofessional and it's worrying someone in an apparently senior role doesn't see that.

If you feel as passionately as you claim then you could spend time campaigning within your industry to promote proper entry level jobs instead of unpaid internships, consider pushing ways to open your industry to more students, get involved in partnerships with state schools and 6th forms to support those talented students with an interest in your area to get into the sector.

I'm not defensive for my children they will be fine, I'm defensive for the vast amount of private school kids who through no fault of their own could loose out because someone as stupid as op is in charge of recruitment, the caveat being of course if they are the best person for the job, I am in no way advocating for private school pupils to get the job just because of their school, but for the best person for the job to get it state or private.
I'm not blind to potential privileges some private school pupils have, I do think it needs to be addressed and I think the correct way to address this is through the proper channels, not by making decisions based on one's own bias as op is doing.

Agree

being prejudiced against someone for something out of their controle is arsehole behaviour. Have a word with yourself, OP.

Well I would imagine the privately educated would have less grit and character than those with a less feathered nest so that may discount them but I am not sure I could have discounted them without some criteria that was more than just they were schooled independently as that was a twist of fate and choice of parent and not their personal choice.

While I'll admit that OP's actions are slightly eccentric. I'm not sure why they are receiving such opprobrium about this.

I'll repeat my point that many professions in the UK still clearly favour people from the 'right' school or university and are prejudiced against 'outsiders'. Why aren't we seeing people up in arms here about unfair recruitment for judges, lawyers, bishops, MPs, top advertising agencies, top military roles, surgeons, and many many more. Clearly there isn't anything resembling a level playing field in those areas.

perhaps a better way to phrase my actions might have been "affirmative action for the benefit of the non-privately educated"

Having read all the OP's post I think I agree with you. Nobody is that stupid are they?

Pushing all the privately educated away to the companies that do want them, creating an even bigger divide.

Or the OP is in fact so bitter and jealous they didn't have a private education.

yeah but you didn't. And still being a bit nobbish.

I went to private school. You know why? because my dad was in the military. I loathed most of it. Homesick, ruined family life - but no school nearby so that was that. I didn't choose that. So first of all home life fucked, then potentially a job fucked because someone like you can't be bothered to recruit properly?

Cheers.

As other pp said: you would have been better off channelling your bitter jealousy into persuading your company to sponsor students from diverse backgrounds, giving the paid internships to match the others etc etc. But that's a lot more challenging than "oh, Oxbridge? fuck off into the bin"

Yabvvvu and I never went to private school! Also it seems even more ridiculous to discard Oxbridge graduates - Oxbridge doesn't cost more than other unis. My ds is applying now and he's never been to private school either.

If it’s not bitterness and you really just care about social justice then why not seek out candidates from other underrepresented demographics in your industry, who have probably faced many more barriers than just going to state school - those with disabilities, who grew up in care or in poverty, have a refugee background, etc.

Your single focus on private school vs state school rather than any other issue suggests to me it is bitterness rather than really wanting to redress the balance.

Or it might simply be the usual prejudice of wanting to hire people like you. Mini mes. Just like the private school hirers you complain about.

Well, yes the benefits tend to be no politics of envy and narrowness of views, and freedom from endemic mediocrity. You'd be deluded to think it's anything else these days.
Just wondering, how do you tolerate for your children to "languish in state schools..." ?
is it ok as long as no one has it better?

I think it’s unfair to reject people just because they went to private school. Not all private schools are elite and it’s not the child’s fault they went to private school. My kids went to a private school but it wasn’t in any way elite and my kids aren’t posh, don’t speak posh have no contacts or networks from the school. They only went because the alternative school had a bad reputation. I can understand more if you’re sick of rich, entitled Etonians etc but a bog standard independent is not churning out prime ministers etc.

I went to private school for the last 2 years of senior school.

Only because we moved areas and the schools that had spaces were shitholes.

My dm scrimped and saved and I ended up on a bursary.

I grew up in a council house with a single parent family I'm not great circumstances.

But you would have rejected me because I went to private school. YABU

Thanks!

I think some people are triggered so powerfully as they understandably want the best for their children, and hate the idea of some comprehensive school oik undoing the advantage they have bought. But the most successful European societies (well, v s Britain) by most meaningful social metrics don't have a large private school sector or even one at all. We can't let a minority of vocal, and wealthy parents keep a system in place that is structurally unfair for the majority.

My younger family members deliberately removed themselves from social media as teens so the only way you could establish they aren't white is by meeting them in person.

I’ve done it - if two candidates are the same I’d choose the one who went to state school. It also tends to be that they’ve worked more in various casual jobs which is useful.

I also consider those factors, yes.

YABU. State educated here.

This thread has made me think that school name ought to be left off all job applications.

This would mean the OP couldn’t discriminate against private school candidates, and her colleagues couldn’t discriminate against state school candidates.

In theory this should mean more state school candidates recruited overall. Assuming it’s just prejudice that has been making her colleagues favour private school candidates of course.

I’m actually serious - I have no idea why school names go on CVs/job applications. It ought to be irrelevant where someone went to school.

Seems an odd career choice for a social justice warrior? Do you feel guilty working in advertising?

I know I didn’t appreciate my rural state comp being scoffed at by the interviewing partner who himself had gone to the local public school and proclaimed how odd it was he had “never heard” of my school🙄. Got the job though.