So many minorities in the government

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not racist to acknowledge that the government has hiring preferences for minorities. My husband, who has been a senior government employee, has been told multiple times that positions are reserved for women and minorities. Luckily, he is in the private sector and thriving well. When the government people contact him asking for suggestions for possible appointees, though, they now almost always specify they are seeking women and minorities. I am all for diversity, but this has really gone too far.

And you and the OP KNOW that this is why the OP had not been hired? Do you or the OP know that a minority ultimately got the job that she sought? See...I have learned in my career that many people just do not want to accept the fact that they are not qualified or that they interviewed poorly. So they speculate and come up with external factors as to why they did not get the job. Believe it or not, the government job market is VERY competitive for positions that require a college degree. For all we know, OP applied for a position with 1000 applicants.

I am the poster you are quoting. No, I do not know her, nor do I know why she has not been hired. As a more general matter, though, there is, at least at the higher levels, a clear preference to hire people who are either minorities or women. In some areas the priority is to hire women, in some areas to hire certain categories of minorities, and in some areas simply not to hire additional Caucasian men. I am quite familiar with senior personnel in several agencies who are regularly asked for potential candidates for appointment. It is not a state secret that what this administration is seeking is a group of minorities and women. In my view, that has both positive and negative policy and practical consequences, but overall I think it has gone too far. To deny that this preferential treatment of women and minorities exists, though, would be wholly disingenuous.

[Anonymous]

I must agree with pp that the hiring priorities of this ainistration is to hire minorities and women. My agency has a memo stating that this is a priority. There is an effort to have the workforce reflect the makeup of our society. White males are not in a good position to get a job with the government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not racist to acknowledge that the government has hiring preferences for minorities. My husband, who has been a senior government employee, has been told multiple times that positions are reserved for women and minorities. Luckily, he is in the private sector and thriving well. When the government people contact him asking for suggestions for possible appointees, though, they now almost always specify they are seeking women and minorities. I am all for diversity, but this has really gone too far.

And you and the OP KNOW that this is why the OP had not been hired? Do you or the OP know that a minority ultimately got the job that she sought? See...I have learned in my career that many people just do not want to accept the fact that they are not qualified or that they interviewed poorly. So they speculate and come up with external factors as to why they did not get the job. Believe it or not, the government job market is VERY competitive for positions that require a college degree. For all we know, OP applied for a position with 1000 applicants.

I am the poster you are quoting. No, I do not know her, nor do I know why she has not been hired. As a more general matter, though, there is, at least at the higher levels, a clear preference to hire people who are either minorities or women. In some areas the priority is to hire women, in some areas to hire certain categories of minorities, and in some areas simply not to hire additional Caucasian men. I am quite familiar with senior personnel in several agencies who are regularly asked for potential candidates for appointment. It is not a state secret that what this administration is seeking is a group of minorities and women. In my view, that has both positive and negative policy and practical consequences, but overall I think it has gone too far. To deny that this preferential treatment of women and minorities exists, though, would be wholly disingenuous.

I won't deny it so long as you don't deny that we got here because of longstanding preferential treatment of White men.

[Anonymous]

They already know the ropes as to how to get into the country legally or otherwise, and they make sure they know how to land cake government jobs. Simple as that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I must agree with pp that the hiring priorities of this ainistration is to hire minorities and women. My agency has a memo stating that this is a priority. There is an effort to have the workforce reflect the makeup of our society. White males are not in a good position to get a job with the government.

You realize that priority is not a mandate? That last four senior professional hires in my agency have been White males and I know that a number of minorities and womoan applied for the positions. The hiring officer for all four is a Black male. But I will concede the point that run of the mill White male candidates no longer have the advantage they once had. Interestingly enough, the underperformers in my division are mostly the older White male professional employees with a lot of senority. In my agency it is those guys who are gumming things up and tying up positions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh geez....I was going to add some tips. I am a hiring officer in my agency and I am a minority. Never mind! I am not in the mood for this "White people as victims" crap.

Be lucky you have never been told that you cannot have a job due to race. I was with one of the local government's. There are very few white people hired. I was told by my white supervisor that she was instructed to hire a minority. I got very lucky with her but there was clear discrimination and it was obvious by who was getting promoted (people who we had to help do their work as they couldn't hack it).

Well, now I guess you know how black people have felt for the last few hundred years (and I didn't want to say this -- but your dumbass post just brought it out of me)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I must agree with pp that the hiring priorities of this ainistration is to hire minorities and women. My agency has a memo stating that this is a priority. There is an effort to have the workforce reflect the makeup of our society. White males are not in a good position to get a job with the government.

Boo-hoo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://data.govloop.com/Government/Minority-Employees-by-Race/tehm-z57r

That data shows that, if anything, it is Hispanics being discriminated against.

(don't worry, I am using data regarding legal ones only)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh geez....I was going to add some tips. I am a hiring officer in my agency and I am a minority. Never mind! I am not in the mood for this "White people as victims" crap.

Be lucky you have never been told that you cannot have a job due to race. I was with one of the local government's. There are very few white people hired. I was told by my white supervisor that she was instructed to hire a minority. I got very lucky with her but there was clear discrimination and it was obvious by who was getting promoted (people who we had to help do their work as they couldn't hack it).

Well, now I guess you know how black people have felt for the last few hundred years (and I didn't want to say this -- but your dumbass post just brought it out of me)

So currently white people are responsible for what happened 100's of years ago? That's your "so there" statement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not racist to acknowledge that the government has hiring preferences for minorities. My husband, who has been a senior government employee, has been told multiple times that positions are reserved for women and minorities. Luckily, he is in the private sector and thriving well. When the government people contact him asking for suggestions for possible appointees, though, they now almost always specify they are seeking women and minorities. I am all for diversity, but this has really gone too far.

And you and the OP KNOW that this is why the OP had not been hired? Do you or the OP know that a minority ultimately got the job that she sought? See...I have learned in my career that many people just do not want to accept the fact that they are not qualified or that they interviewed poorly. So they speculate and come up with external factors as to why they did not get the job. Believe it or not, the government job market is VERY competitive for positions that require a college degree. For all we know, OP applied for a position with 1000 applicants.

I am the poster you are quoting. No, I do not know her, nor do I know why she has not been hired. As a more general matter, though, there is, at least at the higher levels, a clear preference to hire people who are either minorities or women. In some areas the priority is to hire women, in some areas to hire certain categories of minorities, and in some areas simply not to hire additional Caucasian men. I am quite familiar with senior personnel in several agencies who are regularly asked for potential candidates for appointment. It is not a state secret that what this administration is seeking is a group of minorities and women. In my view, that has both positive and negative policy and practical consequences, but overall I think it has gone too far. To deny that this preferential treatment of women and minorities exists, though, would be wholly disingenuous.

I won't deny it so long as you don't deny that we got here because of longstanding preferential treatment of White men.

Well, you can't deny what I said because it is factually true. But I don't actually think that inequalities in one direction need to be addressed by over-correcting in granting preferences. So, while I understand thoughtful people may have different views. I do not believe that past discrimination required the current, in my view ridiculous, set of hiring priorities. We are not a nation divided I to teams by gender and race such that unfair discrimination against one group in the past justifies unfair discrimination against another "team" today. All that does is continue the cycle of our natio. Losing out on top talent, of whatever race or gender, due to discrimination. So, yes, I do deny what you claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh geez....I was going to add some tips. I am a hiring officer in my agency and I am a minority. Never mind! I am not in the mood for this "White people as victims" crap.

Be lucky you have never been told that you cannot have a job due to race. I was with one of the local government's. There are very few white people hired. I was told by my white supervisor that she was instructed to hire a minority. I got very lucky with her but there was clear discrimination and it was obvious by who was getting promoted (people who we had to help do their work as they couldn't hack it).

Well, now I guess you know how black people have felt for the last few hundred years (and I didn't want to say this -- but your dumbass post just brought it out of me)

So currently white people are responsible for what happened 100's of years ago? That's your "so there" statement?

Not the PP but it is interesting that you chose this one to respond to as opposed to the other posts that DO cite more recent issues.

[Anonymous]

So, is it just to discriminate against white men?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh geez....I was going to add some tips. I am a hiring officer in my agency and I am a minority. Never mind! I am not in the mood for this "White people as victims" crap.

Be lucky you have never been told that you cannot have a job due to race. I was with one of the local government's. There are very few white people hired. I was told by my white supervisor that she was instructed to hire a minority. I got very lucky with her but there was clear discrimination and it was obvious by who was getting promoted (people who we had to help do their work as they couldn't hack it).

Well, now I guess you know how black people have felt for the last few hundred years (and I didn't want to say this -- but your dumbass post just brought it out of me)

So currently white people are responsible for what happened 100's of years ago? That's your "so there" statement?

I never mentioned responsibility, I said now the pp knows what black folks have felt like for hundreds of years. But, if you want to go there...let us go.
If in 1772 Purple person A has created laws, systems, and practices that discriminated against Green people, and these systems and values were perpetuated for hundreds of years thereby benefiting Purple people giving them a clear advantage economically and politically over Green people. It is now 50 years since the legalized discrimination has been abolished. Do you think that now all of a sudden Purple people and Green people are on an even playing field?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not racist to acknowledge that the government has hiring preferences for minorities. My husband, who has been a senior government employee, has been told multiple times that positions are reserved for women and minorities. Luckily, he is in the private sector and thriving well. When the government people contact him asking for suggestions for possible appointees, though, they now almost always specify they are seeking women and minorities. I am all for diversity, but this has really gone too far.

And you and the OP KNOW that this is why the OP had not been hired? Do you or the OP know that a minority ultimately got the job that she sought? See...I have learned in my career that many people just do not want to accept the fact that they are not qualified or that they interviewed poorly. So they speculate and come up with external factors as to why they did not get the job. Believe it or not, the government job market is VERY competitive for positions that require a college degree. For all we know, OP applied for a position with 1000 applicants.

I am the poster you are quoting. No, I do not know her, nor do I know why she has not been hired. As a more general matter, though, there is, at least at the higher levels, a clear preference to hire people who are either minorities or women. In some areas the priority is to hire women, in some areas to hire certain categories of minorities, and in some areas simply not to hire additional Caucasian men. I am quite familiar with senior personnel in several agencies who are regularly asked for potential candidates for appointment. It is not a state secret that what this administration is seeking is a group of minorities and women. In my view, that has both positive and negative policy and practical consequences, but overall I think it has gone too far. To deny that this preferential treatment of women and minorities exists, though, would be wholly disingenuous.

I won't deny it so long as you don't deny that we got here because of longstanding preferential treatment of White men.

Well, you can't deny what I said because it is factually true. But I don't actually think that inequalities in one direction need to be addressed by over-correcting in granting preferences. So, while I understand thoughtful people may have different views. I do not believe that past discrimination required the current, in my view ridiculous, set of hiring priorities. We are not a nation divided I to teams by gender and race such that unfair discrimination against one group in the past justifies unfair discrimination against another "team" today. All that does is continue the cycle of our natio. Losing out on top talent, of whatever race or gender, due to discrimination. So, yes, I do deny what you claim.

You just proved what you claim that you want to deny

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh geez....I was going to add some tips. I am a hiring officer in my agency and I am a minority. Never mind! I am not in the mood for this "White people as victims" crap.

Be lucky you have never been told that you cannot have a job due to race. I was with one of the local government's. There are very few white people hired. I was told by my white supervisor that she was instructed to hire a minority. I got very lucky with her but there was clear discrimination and it was obvious by who was getting promoted (people who we had to help do their work as they couldn't hack it).

Well, now I guess you know how black people have felt for the last few hundred years (and I didn't want to say this -- but your dumbass post just brought it out of me)

So currently white people are responsible for what happened 100's of years ago? That's your "so there" statement?

Oh for heaven's sake -- there's STILL plenty of hiring discrimination against black people, every other month some grad student in sociology does another study where they send out identical resumes and the ones with a stereotypically "black" name don't get hired.

Preferences in hiring are not intended to make up for what happened 100 years ago, they're intended to make up for what still goes on today.

Have individual white people been hurt sometimes? Sure. But in the grand scheme of things, WAY more white people have benefited over black people than the other way around. It's like a mountain against a teaspoon.

I'm white, and when I hear a white person complain about racism, I just think, "smallest violin in the world ..."