I don't want to do "DEI Work" at work

[Anonymous]

I appreciate diversity. I don’t appreciate the DEI industry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't is supposed to be that you are not precluded from being hired due to your race, background, age, etc if you are qualified? Not that you are automatically disqualified if you are white? Or old? Old is still a popular reason for discrimination.

Older white women get discriminated against a lot in hiring.

They do! I know more than a few older white women who essentially retired post 55/60 because of this. Professional educated women who just couldn't find a reasonable job. Not trying to be the director or big boss. Usually found some type of part time work for which their over qualification greatly benefited the position at the woman's financial sacrifice.

Not to mention a lot of them get hit with the "Karen" stereotype.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't is supposed to be that you are not precluded from being hired due to your race, background, age, etc if you are qualified? Not that you are automatically disqualified if you are white? Or old? Old is still a popular reason for discrimination.

Older white women get discriminated against a lot in hiring.

They do! I know more than a few older white women who essentially retired post 55/60 because of this. Professional educated women who just couldn't find a reasonable job. Not trying to be the director or big boss. Usually found some type of part time work for which their over qualification greatly benefited the position at the woman's financial sacrifice.

Not to mention a lot of them get hit with the "Karen" stereotype.

+1

Plus, add in resentful women in the office, and you really have a sh*tstorm. Women generally don't know how to support each other, and very few at the top - who got there by being a woman (!!!), do not bother to help other women up - instead of being humble and grateful, they tend to kick downward - as if someone will find out they don't belong at the top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

The idea that diverse teams do better always reeks of manipulated cherry picked data and forced memes than anything factual. It may go back to a single study by one consulting firm. In the real word this obviously makes no sense. There are enormously successful portfolios that are effectively all white, or all Asian or whatever because those countries are white or Asian or whatever. But we all know DEI is really about getting the right quota of blacks. It's not about South Asians or East Asians or even Latinos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

+1

Talent first. If I have someone with a grad degree who is willing to take less money, and a lesser job, because they believe in the cause - and they are good at what they do - they should be supported, not discouraged. Racism of any kind should not be tolerated, and that includes racism against white women, like it or not. Most white women can tell immediately when their POC coworkers have disdain for them. For what? They never did anything to that person, and just met them! If white people treated POC the way some POC (usually women) treat white people (again, usually women) there would be a witch hunt.

There should be a base level of professionalism, which includes being able to get along with other people, and not holding white women to a different standard (which is illegal, BTW). You can't refuse to train a person because they are white, and you can't fabricate reasons for them to not have a job, if they are qualified. Same as you should not be able to fabricate reasons a POC should have a particular job. I foresee more legal action in the future, as DEI takes off. DEI may look great on paper, but it will bring problems to the employer, that the employer did not anticipate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

The idea that diverse teams do better always reeks of manipulated cherry picked data and forced memes than anything factual. It may go back to a single study by one consulting firm. In the real word this obviously makes no sense. There are enormously successful portfolios that are effectively all white, or all Asian or whatever because those countries are white or Asian or whatever. But we all know DEI is really about getting the right quota of blacks. It's not about South Asians or East Asians or even Latinos.

+1

Therein lies one of the major problems with DEI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

The idea that diverse teams do better always reeks of manipulated cherry picked data and forced memes than anything factual. It may go back to a single study by one consulting firm. In the real word this obviously makes no sense. There are enormously successful portfolios that are effectively all white, or all Asian or whatever because those countries are white or Asian or whatever. But we all know DEI is really about getting the right quota of blacks. It's not about South Asians or East Asians or even Latinos.

+1

Therein lies one of the major problems with DEI.

Yes, DEI went from providing all types of POC with opportunities to just doing so for black people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

The idea that diverse teams do better always reeks of manipulated cherry picked data and forced memes than anything factual. It may go back to a single study by one consulting firm. In the real word this obviously makes no sense. There are enormously successful portfolios that are effectively all white, or all Asian or whatever because those countries are white or Asian or whatever. But we all know DEI is really about getting the right quota of blacks. It's not about South Asians or East Asians or even Latinos.

+1

Therein lies one of the major problems with DEI.

Yes, DEI went from providing all types of POC with opportunities to just doing so for black people.

+1

Exactly. Wouldn't mind someone handing me a job because of how I look, with low to zero expectations, a million different "chances" (but repeated serious errors), and full pay. All to check a box!

There are plenty of educated, qualified people (who actually want to work - contrary to what I have seen) without box checking. Some of the best workers I have had are those who actually want to make a difference, not someone who knows they have had something handed to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

The idea that diverse teams do better always reeks of manipulated cherry picked data and forced memes than anything factual. It may go back to a single study by one consulting firm. In the real word this obviously makes no sense. There are enormously successful portfolios that are effectively all white, or all Asian or whatever because those countries are white or Asian or whatever. But we all know DEI is really about getting the right quota of blacks. It's not about South Asians or East Asians or even Latinos.

I don’t think anyone said they always do better. There definitely is evidence that interviewers can have inherent biases so they subconsciously seek out people who are like themselves. And groupthink is definitely a thing, especially in non diverse teams. However, none of this is a given and it depends on how you define diversity. Look at the UK government in recent years. Very diverse in terms of skin colour and gender - black, brown, women, etc. but also completely incompetent. If you look at their diversity closer, they all went to private schools, especially Eton, then Oxford. Ironically, a white person who went to a state school and was raised by a single parent in public housing would be diverse in that case.

Many years ago, I joined the graduate recruitment program of another country’s foreign service. It was hard to get into - about 38 positions with 10,000 applicants. The group ended up being incredibly diverse - an ICU nurse who had retrained in finance, a motorbike courier who had studied an accounting degree at night school, a poet, etc. The level of diversity was amazing in terms of academic and professional experience and life experience. There was also a range of ethnic backgrounds and half were women. If it had been a box ticking exercise, I suspect they would have ended up with a cadre of 24 year olds of various colours who had all completed a masters in international relations. True diversity can be amazing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

My agency DEI actually said that talent or ability shouldn't be prioritized in hiring. Just satisfy a quota and that diverse person will suddenly become a subject matter expert or be trained up through osmosis. We will be so prepared to hire a trans person should one apply though! Last few initiatives have been all-in on possible trans issues that haven't come up in real life

Huh. I should apply as an unemployed woman who identifies as an employed trans woman! Would that work!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

The idea that diverse teams do better always reeks of manipulated cherry picked data and forced memes than anything factual. It may go back to a single study by one consulting firm. In the real word this obviously makes no sense. There are enormously successful portfolios that are effectively all white, or all Asian or whatever because those countries are white or Asian or whatever. But we all know DEI is really about getting the right quota of blacks. It's not about South Asians or East Asians or even Latinos.

I don’t think anyone said they always do better. There definitely is evidence that interviewers can have inherent biases so they subconsciously seek out people who are like themselves. And groupthink is definitely a thing, especially in non diverse teams. However, none of this is a given and it depends on how you define diversity. Look at the UK government in recent years. Very diverse in terms of skin colour and gender - black, brown, women, etc. but also completely incompetent. If you look at their diversity closer, they all went to private schools, especially Eton, then Oxford. Ironically, a white person who went to a state school and was raised by a single parent in public housing would be diverse in that case.

Many years ago, I joined the graduate recruitment program of another country’s foreign service. It was hard to get into - about 38 positions with 10,000 applicants. The group ended up being incredibly diverse - an ICU nurse who had retrained in finance, a motorbike courier who had studied an accounting degree at night school, a poet, etc. The level of diversity was amazing in terms of academic and professional experience and life experience. There was also a range of ethnic backgrounds and half were women. If it had been a box ticking exercise, I suspect they would have ended up with a cadre of 24 year olds of various colours who had all completed a masters in international relations. True diversity can be amazing.

yes, but diversity for diversity's sake does not guarantee SME or qualifications. I'm sure this recruitment process looked at quals....?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

The idea that diverse teams do better always reeks of manipulated cherry picked data and forced memes than anything factual. It may go back to a single study by one consulting firm. In the real word this obviously makes no sense. There are enormously successful portfolios that are effectively all white, or all Asian or whatever because those countries are white or Asian or whatever. But we all know DEI is really about getting the right quota of blacks. It's not about South Asians or East Asians or even Latinos.

I don’t think anyone said they always do better. There definitely is evidence that interviewers can have inherent biases so they subconsciously seek out people who are like themselves. And groupthink is definitely a thing, especially in non diverse teams. However, none of this is a given and it depends on how you define diversity. Look at the UK government in recent years. Very diverse in terms of skin colour and gender - black, brown, women, etc. but also completely incompetent. If you look at their diversity closer, they all went to private schools, especially Eton, then Oxford. Ironically, a white person who went to a state school and was raised by a single parent in public housing would be diverse in that case.

Many years ago, I joined the graduate recruitment program of another country’s foreign service. It was hard to get into - about 38 positions with 10,000 applicants. The group ended up being incredibly diverse - an ICU nurse who had retrained in finance, a motorbike courier who had studied an accounting degree at night school, a poet, etc. The level of diversity was amazing in terms of academic and professional experience and life experience. There was also a range of ethnic backgrounds and half were women. If it had been a box ticking exercise, I suspect they would have ended up with a cadre of 24 year olds of various colours who had all completed a masters in international relations. True diversity can be amazing.

yes, but diversity for diversity's sake does not guarantee SME or qualifications. I'm sure this recruitment process looked at quals....?

Yes, absolutely, looked at quals. They were many rounds of exams and interviews to get through. The reality is, when you have a pool of 10,000 eager applicants, they’re going to be many smart qualified people to choose from who all could do the job. It’s quite Interesting, 28 years later, to look at the half of the graduate cohort who remained and see who has been promoted or ended up in senior level positions. It’s not always who you would expect. A close friend is now the ambassador to a European country and she didn’t make it through the graduate screening process but joined as an admin trainee. However, she shone once she was in the department and displayed the emotional intelligence and managerial skills that a formalised graduate recruitment process didn’t pick up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate diversity. I don’t appreciate the DEI industry.

You want diversity on YOUR terms. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI is a gaslighting cult along the lines of Q-Anon or Scientology, not a management tool or some type of mechanism for social justice. Just ignore it.

+1. Cult is absolutely right. As a federal employee suffering through a deluge of DEI initiatives under this administration, it is stunning to watch. I'm so tempted to raise my hand at one of these ridiculous meetings and ask for evidence or data in support the outlandish statements our diversity officers routinely make, but it would be professional suicide to do so.

This is absurd. I would in financial services. There is a ton of data that shows that diverse portfolio management teams do better than than their all white male counterparts.

Companies would diversify naturally if it truly benefited them financially. Except if doesn’t. It’s a red flag if a company is promoting based on skin color instead of talent.

That ... isn't true at all.