So, again, in an effort to broaden the Debate section to some more logical and less "I think you're dumb because you disagree with me," I'd like to propose a new debate. #######+++####### In our current day and age, it is not rare to hire a person because that person is a minority or a female. Everyone has heard the end of the radio ad - "Minorities and women encouraged to apply." #######+++####### With that in mind, I'd like to ask who YOU think should get the job. To keep everyone on the same page, I'd like us to discuss regarding the following hypothetical example... #######+++####### Both of these lads are applying for a roofing job. Which do you feel is worthy of being hired? John An African-American of healthy age. Lower Class. Applying for construction job to roof houses. In greater need of the job than Bob. Has 5 months of experience applying Dry-Wall. A fast learner, but has a short temper. Finished high school, dropped out of his first year of college. Bob A Caucasian of healthy age. Middle Class. Applying for construction job to roof houses. Needs the job, but not as much as John Has 18 months experience roofing and laying tile. Set in his ways. Doesn't work with others well, but is quite efficient by himself. Left high school as a Junior, but received his GED at a later date. #######+++####### For the most part, I will be playing "devil's advocate." I usually don't take sides on debates I start because I'm usually ignorant of the topic itself. That's why I start it, lulz- to learn more about it. Anywho, it's definitely a tough decision. On one hand, you have an underprivileged man in need of a job. You don't want to rob him of the opportunity to work and learn a trade. However, you also have a man who technically deserves the job more because of his knowledge in the field. He is more likely to help your business, but doesn't necessarily need the job as much as John. GO!
Bob... i am no racist... but Afracan Americans have made i clear color is no issue and that they r equal and that they so be treated just lik us so w/ that out of the way... does it matter what "class" the ppl come from and how much they neeed the job... I need a job... but that doesn't mean i will get it... so the only true things that i believe matter is there qualifications, job history, skills, and their record.... let Afracan Americans and Caucasians just be AMERICAN... and i realize that black ppl didnt get jobs and YOTA YOTA YOTA... but i dont think that black ppl give equal jobs to caucasians... and no i dont HATE african americans i live in Omaha and have lots of AA freinds... but i think we (caucasians) should be treated no different for the fact we are caucasians
Good points. However, given some time and effort, what if John could end up benefiting the employer more than Bob? After all, his necessity for the job will definitely encourage him to be a harder worker, don't you think?
There are more factors than just race. The fact that John lacks experience means that the employer can pay him less money, which may motivate him to choose the individual with less experience. On the other hand an employer may need someone who is more experienced. It depends on the job I suppose. Another thing to take into consideration is personality. We don't really know who Bob and John are, but the employer is more likely to hire the person they feel will be able to communicate the best. So it could go either way, unless of course the company doesn't meet the diversity requirements.
Interesting, this comes down to political correctness. Sometime employers hire minorities or women regarding of experience just to show in there statistics they are "diverse" And they are often rewarded for said statistics. I think you should be hired regardless of race or sex in most jobs. The amount of experience you have should reflect whether or not you get hired. In the case of the construction job you choices in hiring women become narrow to select few women who can actually perform the job at hand. In forgehub, would you get a diverse team of forgers to forge a map for a contest? Or would you get high experienced forgers who can: build, communicate and cooperate with the rest of the team? Exactly.
I pick bob. john is obviously a crack addict. plus where are you living where the play ads where they encourage women and minorities to apply??? I'm in califonia and have never head such a thing. I don't think employers are discrimitory at all. Maybe its just california but race really doesnt matter.
Interesting topic, man. I'm not going to pick a side based on that amount of info, but let me see if I can illuminate a different perspective. What if there's more to the hiring process than just how much it benefits the company? One way businesses are accepted into the community is by being useful to the community. That's certainly good for them. Actually this was just brought up in my Museum Studies class. We were talking about staffing a museum with employees vs. volunteers. Yeah, the museum can do more if it has a healthy volunteer program, but at the same time, it shows goodwill to the community if it is also a good employer. So back to the two people you mentioned: by alleviating the greater need for a job, they have done more to solidify their existence in the community.
"by alleviating the greater need for a job, they have done more to solidify their existence in the community." ^^That's not something I'd thought about at all. Excellent point. Perhaps, though, I didn't provide enough information. I tried make their situations different, but consistent at the same time. I'll throw up some extra info, though, and try to keep it neutral. EDIT.. Please, if you desire to contribute to the discussion, do so with correct logic. Thank you for your input, but I really cannot justify racism/profiling as anything relatively close to a valuable contribution.
I would hire Bob. He has the eperiance. Personaly, I wouldn't hire anone with a short temper. I need my employees to remain calm and collected at all times. Anger just leads to mistakes.
Likewise, teamwork increases efficiency. Someone unwilling to work with others might end up burdening the progress more than someone who gets agitated.
John An African-American of healthy age. Lower Class. Applying for construction job to roof houses. In greater need of the job than Bob. Has 5 months of experience applying Dry-Wall. A fast learner, but has a short temper. Finished high school, dropped out of his first year of college. Bob A Caucasian of healthy age. Middle Class. Applying for construction job to roof houses. Needs the job, but not as much as John Has 18 months experience roofing and laying tile. Set in his ways. Doesn't work with others well, but is quite efficient by himself. Left high school as a Junior, but received his GED at a later date. Bob has more positives than John in the way I view it... One thing all must do is work with others... And clearly a short temper is not good. Plus Bob has more experience that John...
Bob A Caucasian of healthy age. Middle Class. Applying for construction job to roof houses. Needs the job, but not as much as John Has 18 months experience roofing and laying tile. Set in his ways. Doesn't work with others well, but is quite efficient by himself. Left high school as a Junior, but received his GED at a later date. _____________________________________________________________ You contradicted yourself, RadiantRain, in saying that it's necessary for one to work with others, but that Bob was the better choice. Consider that John has an obviously greater drive for schooling, but for whatever reason, was unable to complete his higher education. Also, don't be fooled by thinking that every construction company does the same quality of work. Perhaps, the employer might have high standards. In that case, someone who is obviously going to need teaching would be the better choice.
Johh, however has a short temper and in a workplace of any sort that's unacceptable. The necessity of the job should not affect who is employed what-so-ever. That is never asked on a resume. However it would be Bob who is employed, depending on the company or group of people hiring. Mostly because it is a roof job, and Bob has 18 months experience in the field of "Roofing" in comparison to John's, irrelevant 5 months experience in dry-wall. BUT: John also has a higher education in comparison to Bob, and for this, neither of these two are really fit to work this job, if I was the employer.
John's five months are not irrelevant. Compare those five months to five months of filing papers. I believe the latter of those would be less qualified for a construction job, and that makes his five months relevant. "The necessity of the job should not affect who is employed what-so-ever." That's quite the bold opinion. I began this thread for that very reason, though- to see who thought a person's color/gender should factor into his/her likelihood of receiving the job. However, the next part.... "That is never asked on a resume." That part's half-wrong and half-right. It's not asked on resumes often, but it is surveyed in interviews. A person's desire or need for the job affects how well they execute the tasks at hand. Someone with 3 kids at home to feed isn't going to slack off on a job they need, because missing even a few days of work while finding a new job could royally screw them over.
Five months in not irrelevant, but five months of dry wall versus eighteen months of roofing for a roofing job makes the five months look bad.
Honestly, I'd have to go with Bob. He has more experience and works well alone. Although being a good social worker is a nice skill, people can often distract you. Not to mention a guy with a short temper with a hammer and sharp objects doesn't work too well.
As I stated: I personally am a part of interviews for my family's company. I chose roofing for this topic because that's what we do, and it's something I am at least slightly capable of holding my own in (at least as far as discussion goes =] ). That said, our company works differently than every other in our county. We charge up to $3,000 more for a roof. This is because our roofs last at least a decade longer than every other contractor in our area. Now, when we're hiring, we search for people "unexperienced" in roofing, but at least with some construction background. Why? Because of the fact that the "experienced" roofers in our area are called experienced because of their speed, not their quality. Starting an employee anew allows the owner and foreman to insure he knows things like applying plastic cement on every shingle on the eave, using StormGuard Peel-N-Stick on any area that commonly has winds exceeding 45 MPH, and so on. Here in Florida, things like that are a big deal. Not taking the extra three days worth of work that we take could end up costing the owners hundreds of thousands of dollars in merchandise repair and replacement, and that's not even counting the damage done to the house itself. There's quite a difference in "short tempered" and "eratically insane." A short-tempered person is known to blurt out profanity without hesitance and things of that sort, not balastically attack a co-worker.