Is the discrimination worth it as a deterrent? Or is it just to save the instance companies $$$?

  • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I was at a management training and HR was covering protected classes of people. They asked if it was ever ok to discriminate when hiring. I thought it was a trick question, and said yes. Everyone was shocked because they were expecting me to say something racist. I said it’s perfectly fine to discriminate against someone with no work history, bad references, multiple jobs in a very short time etc.

    Moment of silence and then they say: “No. It is NEVER ok to discriminate.”

    Fucking morons.

    • NightAuthor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As a fairly logic/science based thinker, it’s so frustrating seeing people drop all nuance and detail from their knowledge. And then they pass it on, judge others by their “knowledge” and it just keeps spreading. Eventually the general public knows that an elephant has a trunk, but will scorn you if you say it also has a tail.

    • fiat_lux@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      From a dictionary perspective, you’re right. From a business legal risk-avoidant and financial self-protection perspective, you’re dead wrong. Words are often used with a context-specific definition, and you’re not supposed to use the word ‘discrimination’ at all in a workplace. Because it will cause the legal and HR departments more work, and therefore cost the organisation more.

      Just let the HR rep do the script and teach you how to avoid accountability when prioritising profit over people. It’s less painful that way.

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just let the HR rep do the script and teach you how to avoid accountability when prioritising profit over people. It’s less painful that way.

        Profit over people IS painful to me. Eat the rich.

        • fiat_lux@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s also painful to me, which is why I sat quietly through the training, gave the answers they wanted, and then made managerial decisions that were deliberately people-prioritising and at least somewhat inconspicuous. Luckily, they had trained me to know what they’re looking for.

    • Dave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The whole point of the “protected class” is that you may not discriminate using those criteria. The corollary is that you may discriminate using other criteria. Otherwise, there would be no point in creating a “protected class”.

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly. I guess they hadn’t realized that everyone that applied and didn’t get hired had technically been discriminated against for some reason, and they didn’t want a record of them saying in ANY form that “discrimination” was ok.

        Decades later all 30 done of their locations got their franchise revoked and they closed down. Has nothing to do with the story, but vindication! 😂

      • yesman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ps. (For the dense of you)

        I love your post; it should be a copypasta. Topping off a semantic argument by insisting others are dense is so ironic that I don’t know if you’re sincere, or some kind of galaxy-brained performance artist.

        Ps. please don’t interpret my post as a rebuttal of your point. You want to argue about the definition of the word discriminate, I want to argue about the definition of the word definition.

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No. The word differentiate doesn’t work because I wasn’t talking about identifying the differences in people I was talking about TREATING PEOPLE DIFFERENTLY based on a single trait.

        I thought it was a trick question. That’s why I gave the answer. I know it’s not what they were looking for, but they didn’t have to look at me like I was from another planet.

        As a manager I DISCRIMINATED against people who didn’t show up for work. I DISCRIMINATED against people who showed up drunk. Those people got different treatment. They lost hours. They didn’t get raises. They got fired. I would NEVER discriminate based on race or gender or color of hair. Personally, I wouldn’t discriminate against drug users, but that same company demanded that we did.

        It’s still discrimination it’s just that sometimes it’s legal and sometimes it’s not.