Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Companies who value diversity have to come up with ways to recruit the groups that are underrepresented in their companies. This policy is actually based on numbers, not some nefarious factor like racism.

They are a private company. It is their right.

You are probably the same poster who is always saying how horrible it is for Asians to try to gain admittance to college. And I say this as someone coming from a family who is half Asian.

Try not to see everything through the lens of racism against your group.

That's not how protected classifications work under the constitution. Take a con law class.

You don’t know the meaning of the words you’re using. Protected “classification” is not a thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish they concentrated on income of the family rather than race, this way they could help poor students of all races. And yes, this would enable them to increase URM participation while not excluding poor Asian and White candidates.

However - I am a-ok with this too. Good for Pfizer.

- Asian-American.

So is it OK for a POC from a rich family in Potomac MD that attended Sidwell and go on Princeton to apply while a poor white kid who lives in Annandale can't apply?

This logical fallacy is called “whataboutism.”

I’m Asian and I don’t have a problem with this.

The people who benefit from these types of programs are UMC blacks and Hispanics. There are a lot of them.

Anonymous wrote:Companies who value diversity have to come up with ways to recruit the groups that are underrepresented in their companies. This policy is actually based on numbers, not some nefarious factor like racism.

They are a private company. It is their right.

You are probably the same poster who is always saying how horrible it is for Asians to try to gain admittance to college. And I say this as someone coming from a family who is half Asian.

Try not to see everything through the lens of racism against your group.

That's not how protected classifications work under the constitution. Take a con law class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish they concentrated on income of the family rather than race, this way they could help poor students of all races. And yes, this would enable them to increase URM participation while not excluding poor Asian and White candidates.

However - I am a-ok with this too. Good for Pfizer.

- Asian-American.

So is it OK for a POC from a rich family in Potomac MD that attended Sidwell and go on Princeton to apply while a poor white kid who lives in Annandale can't apply?

+1. It's not okay. It should be income-based.

This is correct. It also opens the door for "Elizabeth Warren-like" behavior if you know what I mean...it is a slippery slope that creates racialized resentment and asks kids to dig deep into the family tree for someone who fits the bill regardless of the privilege they have. This is not the correct path.

But the point is to increase racial diversity not increase income diversity (which may be a different scholarship). Sure, some wealthier POC might get it, but do you not think they faces discrimination on the basis of their color regardless of wealth? They do. Also, representation matters. Having POC in the workforce encourages more (nobody wants to be the only one).

I’m white and totally support this.

Do you think Asians face discrimination (or god forbid even hate crimes where they are beaten or killed) regardless of their wealth?

Anonymous wrote:Guessing the whites & asians who are all for the restrictions wouldn't want their own kids involved with the program anyway. Too many restrictions & possible shade, when your kids naturally have way better opportunities. I do like the income restriction aspect. There really are low income, first gen white kids all over this country who would benefit from this sort of program.

+1 when it impacts your kid directly, your perspective changes.

Guessing the whites & asians who are all for the restrictions wouldn't want their own kids involved with the program anyway. Too many restrictions & possible shade, when your kids naturally have way better opportunities. I do like the income restriction aspect. There really are low income, first gen white kids all over this country who would benefit from this sort of program.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm asian and I have no problem with this

I’m white and I also have no problem with this.

Nor I. (I"m white). It's a private company. If you don't like it, vote with your feet and don't give them your money (if you can).

Having said that, I do think a PP had a valid point about the resentment that this does cause in some segments. I'm not saying don't do this but they should message it better or do something to address those concerns.

LOL, I like how you think even if consumers tried to band together, they could do anything at all against a giant like Pfizer.
These kinds of things also make some people think that Black people are only there because everyone else was excluded. I say, make it based on socioeconomic status.

Anonymous wrote:It’s a program to encourage URMs with an interest in the field. What is the problem with that?

- Not a URM

+ 1

It is such a specific program and will only be of use to those who are interested in that field, those who have a talent for it and an appetite to study and work for 9 years long scholarship, and who also want to work in that specific company and field.

If they are doing this to encourage URMs to apply to the programs - I applaud them. It is not as if they have throngs of URMs and non-URMs waiting to apply for this. No one should have a problem with this.

- Asian-American

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish they concentrated on income of the family rather than race, this way they could help poor students of all races. And yes, this would enable them to increase URM participation while not excluding poor Asian and White candidates.

However - I am a-ok with this too. Good for Pfizer.

- Asian-American.

So is it OK for a POC from a rich family in Potomac MD that attended Sidwell and go on Princeton to apply while a poor white kid who lives in Annandale can't apply?

+1. It's not okay. It should be income-based.

Depends on your goal. If it is to achieve ethnic diversity, then they are doing it right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm asian and I have no problem with this

I’m white and I also have no problem with this.

Nor I. (I"m white). It's a private company. If you don't like it, vote with your feet and don't give them your money (if you can).

Having said that, I do think a PP had a valid point about the resentment that this does cause in some segments. I'm not saying don't do this but they should message it better or do something to address those concerns.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish they concentrated on income of the family rather than race, this way they could help poor students of all races. And yes, this would enable them to increase URM participation while not excluding poor Asian and White candidates.

However - I am a-ok with this too. Good for Pfizer.

- Asian-American.

So is it OK for a POC from a rich family in Potomac MD that attended Sidwell and go on Princeton to apply while a poor white kid who lives in Annandale can't apply?

Well, the truth is the POC from a rich family in Potomac MD who attended Sidwell and went to Princeton is going to Wall Street or Law anyways and what Pfizer is offering and what Pfizer is asking in return (9 years committment) may be too restrictive for them. Who wants to commit to multi-years with any company if they are already loaded?

Anonymous wrote:I’m Asian. I used to have kept telling my children as soon as they entered high school that they will need do much better than their non-Asian peers in order to access the same opportunities. It’s the reality and no use to think if it’s fair or not. They can try to do something when they have more time in the future, but definitely not in high school.

Same thing happened with the Jews. They were systematically excluded from many cultures. I am pretty sure their parents told their children as they entered high school that they will need do much better than their non-Jewish peers in order to access the same opportunities. We are now seeing what happens when a group of people had to work harder for equal consideration of interest. The Jews, as a group, are sought out, rightly or wrongly, as people who are generally smarter than the rest. We, as a group, seek out Jewish doctors, lawyers, businessmen, CPAs... So, don't despair about hard work, discipline, and dedication to your mission...

Anonymous wrote:I doubt OP is Asian. It's a post designed to stoke anti-Asian hate.

Yep. It seems like there is an angry troll that tries to stir dissent on here.

i am asian and this is not ok, it should be all minorities