[Shaddim]

Recently a position opened up in one of my companies. Usually I get very excited about this because I love hiring people. Yeah, I usually overpay and spoil my employees, but I expect a great deal from them, so I believe it balances out. Anyway, it came down to two people who were both equally qualified and motivated. Well, almost, but I'll get into that later.

Candidate #1 is a black lady, she's a single (divorced) mother with two children.

Candidate #2 is a white male, single, raising a 3 y/o daughter.

After thinking about it for almost a week, I chose the woman. The sticking point, I think the guy has a bit more experience and would require a little less supervision in the beginning. I suppose I'm a bit ashamed to admit it, but I largely chose her because I think it would be easier for the white guy to find employment elsewhere and I wanted to give the lady an opportunity. So, the truth is, if I weren't aware of the color of their skin I likely would have picked him. Kim said that I "did the right thing" but this really bothers me.

Thoughts? Opinions?

[Big Mac]

You're racially "sensitive" I suppose. Your choice could be considered light "reverse-racism," but racism itself, I don't think so.

[Dakar V]

Yeah, you're technically racist. Wouldn't lose any sleep over it though. I wouldn't be surprised if gender factored in too.

[ort888]

How can you live with yourself, you dirty dirty racist?

Seriously though... we're all racists. Everyone is. Don't try to fight it. Just be aware of it and do your best to always be a good person.

[Oisín]

You horrible, horrible person you. You just brought about the end of civilisation as we know it. I hope you’re happy with yourself now!

Dripping sarcasm aside, though—no, you’re not. If they were otherwise equally qualified, you’d still have to choose one. Most would probably choose the one that required the least supervision as the ‘easier’ choice; it speaks in your favour, in my opinion, that you did the opposite. Having been in a position where it was nearly impossible to get a job due to lack of experience, I realise the impact a small thing like this can have.

Edit: Damn you, ort888! You stole my punchline, you … you … you RACIST you! (Actually, I’m not sure Danes count as a race—but we should!)

[Laminar]

Want to know whether or not you're racist?

Take this test.

[Dakar V]

Too many hoops to jump through to do anything with that.

[andi*pandi]

what's more interesting to me is how it's relevant how many children they each have, and their marital status.

[Eug]

Which do you think would have been easier to get along with? If the same, I would have picked the more experienced guy.

I'm not a fan of reverse discrimination, which in effect this was. You basically imposed your own form of affirmative action for whatever reason. The fact that you are a bit uncomfortable with the decision says something IMO.

Mind you, ultimately the choice is yours, and it's not as if you're burning people at the stake or anything. It sounds like that as far as reverse discrimination goes, this was a mild form of it, as both seemed motivated to work and were qualified.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Recently a position opened up in one of my companies. Usually I get very excited about this because I love hiring people. Yeah, I usually overpay and spoil my employees, but I expect a great deal from them, so I believe it balances out. Anyway, it came down to two people who were both equally qualified and motivated. Well, almost, but I'll get into that later.

Candidate #1 is a black lady, she's a single (divorced) mother with two children.

Candidate #2 is a white male, single, raising a 3 y/o daughter.

After thinking about it for almost a week, I chose the woman. The sticking point, I think the guy has a bit more experience and would require a little less supervision in the beginning. I suppose I'm a bit ashamed to admit it, but I largely chose her because I think it would be easier for the white guy to find employment elsewhere and I wanted to give the lady an opportunity. So, the truth is, if I weren't aware of the color of their skin I likely would have picked him. Kim said that I "did the right thing" but this really bothers me.

Thoughts? Opinions?

Sorry, but you flunk the "impartiality" test. You are, in fact, a racist if you considered race in making the decision. Sounds like you did.

Consider if you'd gone in the OTHER direction? Would THAT be racism? Golly sure, you betcha!

[ort888]

And you haven't lived until you've used the phrase "darkie" in front of several NAACP volunteers, which I have actually done.

Good times. And I'm as white as a cave salamander.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

what's more interesting to me is how it's relevant how many children they each have, and their marital status.

That's a good point. I like hiring family-oriented people, they tend to be less flighty.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by finboy 

Sorry, but you flunk the "impartiality" test. You are, in fact, a racist if you considered race in making the decision. Sounds like you did.

Consider if you'd gone in the OTHER direction? Would THAT be racism? Golly sure, you betcha!

Oh, I know. The thing is, I despise gov't imposed affirmative action.

Hmmm, is it racism because I chose the black lady, or because I thought the white guy would have an easier time finding employment elsewhere?

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I think it would be easier for the white guy to find employment elsewhere and I wanted to give the lady an opportunity.

You're kidding, right? White males are stepped on more than any other demographic in today's society. They're The Evil White Man who oppresses women and racial minorities whenever possible. My best friend is a white male and is having a hell of a time finding a job, because companies choose women and/or minorities simply for being non-male and/or non-white.

So, yes. That was a racist - and a sexist - move. You discriminated against the other candidate due to two things he could not control - his gender and his race. If he knew that's why he was passed up for the job, he'd have every right to sue your company for discrimination.

Disappointing, to say the least.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Oh, I know. The thing is, I despise gov't imposed affirmative action.

Well, this is similar, just milder.

Hmmm, is it racism because I chose the black lady, or because I thought the white guy would have an easier time finding employment elsewhere?

Yes. You chose that black woman cuz she was black (and a woman?) and you didn't choose the white guy cuz he was a white guy.

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

You're kidding, right? White males are stepped on more than any other demographic in today's society. They're The Evil White Man who oppresses women and racial minorities whenever possible. My best friend is a white male and is having a hell of a time finding a job, because companies choose women and/or minorities simply for being non-male and/or non-white.

Are you sure about that? That is often the belief, but that is not always true. It was true in the case of this thread, but I've come across some white males that were discriminated against... for being less qualified or for having a bad attitude. Yet their perception was not that it was their qualifications and/or attitude. It was a perceived racial slight against them, even though it wasn't true.

P.S. I have recommended less qualified people for job hires sometimes simply because I got along with them better personality-wise but that's not the same thing. Attitude and working relationship is very important for colleagues/employees.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

You're kidding, right? White males are stepped on more than any other demographic in today's society. They're The Evil White Man who oppresses women and racial minorities whenever possible. My best friend is a white male and is having a hell of a time finding a job, because companies choose women and/or minorities simply for being non-male and/or non-white.

Ummm, he found another job within 48 hours, making very similar money. The lady, on the other hand, had been looking for a good job for almost a year and is currently working as a waitress, despite the fact that she has a bachelor's in business administration.

I'm not saying that what I did was noble, but it's probably not as sinister as you're portraying it to be.

[Tomchu]

Did "neediness" factor at all into your decision process?

I would have considered the fact that the person raising two kids is going to be needier than the person raising one kid -- thus leading to missed days of work, "going home early" because of some child-related emergency, etc. From what I've seen and heard, parents of young kids generally try to milk the system and think they deserve some special treatment from their employers.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Tomchu 

Did "neediness" factor at all into your decision process?

I would have considered the fact that the person raising two kids is going to be needier than the person raising one kid -- thus leading to missed days of work, "going home early" because of some child-related emergency, etc. From what I've seen and heard, parents of young kids generally try to milk the system and think they deserve some special treatment from their employers.

Hmmm....

I have seen individuals who are like this, but then again I have also seen kid-less individuals who take an inordinately high number of sick days... especially on Monday or before long weekends.

[paul w]

As a stepped on white guy who's been on the job market a few times over the years, I have no problem with your hiring practices. As long as they can do the job to your satisfaction you should stand by your hiring policy. People should get hired for more than pure on paper qualifications anyway.

FWIW my personal, anecdotal experience with friends, family and colleagues mirrors Shaddim's assertion that for whatever reason it's that much harder to find work as a person of color.

[Doofy]

I'd have employed the black chick. Because she's got boobies and stuff.

Oh, and two mouths to feed, rather than one. If she's been looking for work for a while she'll be more appreciative of the job.

Screw the idiot PC folks who have you second-guessing your motives. It's your business, not theirs.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Tomchu 

Did "neediness" factor at all into your decision process?

I would have considered the fact that the person raising two kids is going to be needier than the person raising one kid -- thus leading to missed days of work, "going home early" because of some child-related emergency, etc. From what I've seen and heard, parents of young kids generally try to milk the system and think they deserve some special treatment from their employers.

I think it did, to a degree. She seemed a little more desperate.

I did call her present employer, and she hadn't missed a single day of work in 10 months.

[TheWOAT]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Ummm, he found another job within 48 hours, making very similar money. The lady, on the other hand, had been looking for a good job for almost a year and is currently working as a waitress, despite the fact that she has a bachelor's in business administration.

I'm not saying that what I did was noble, but it's probably not as sinister as you're portraying it to be.

All is well that ends well.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Screw the idiot PC folks who have you second-guessing your motives. It's your business, not theirs.

Well, he did start the thread, so there is some uneasiness there in his decision methinks.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Well, he did start the thread, so there is some uneasiness there in his decision methinks.

Yeah, but that uneasiness ain't natural - it's societal pressure imposed from above by the PC crowd.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Yeah, but that uneasiness ain't natural - it's societal pressure imposed from above by the PC crowd.

I think that's the reason that I started this thread. Is my uneasiness spurred by external pressures, am I just overreacting?

BTW, I did notice the McCain sticker on her car, but I didn't hold it against her.

[Eug]

Well, if I had made the decision on racial and gender grounds alone, I'd be a bit uncomfortable too.

And not from external pressures either.

[Railroader]

I remember once being asked during a call to affirm my decision to accept a job, "Are you still hispanic?".

?!?!?!

I'll admit, I don't look very "minority". Actually, during the winter I am nearly transparent. But it was certainly a weird question for a $60k/year job.

[Dakar V]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

, "Are you still hispanic?"

"No, the anti-biotics did their job."

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Well, if I had made the decision on racial and gender grounds alone, I'd be a bit uncomfortable too.

And not from external pressures either.

In part, that's the point too, how much did race and gender influence me? Was it because that I knew she was having a more difficult time making ends meet? Sometimes these things are difficult to assess.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Dakar V 

"No, the anti-biotics did their job."

My employer gets special considerations because I'm Hispanic, and I've wondered how much my race influenced their decision to hire me.

[andi*pandi]

Originally Posted by Tomchu 

Did "neediness" factor at all into your decision process?

I would have considered the fact that the person raising two kids is going to be needier than the person raising one kid -- thus leading to missed days of work, "going home early" because of some child-related emergency, etc. From what I've seen and heard, parents of young kids generally try to milk the system and think they deserve some special treatment from their employers.

It's attitudes like this that are supposed to keep employers from even asking about your family, religion, etc in an interview. Or age. It's illegal afaik, and certainly irrelevant to your job experience.

[Shaddim]

I agree, that should never be asked. Though, I did say "tell me a little about you". Within a minute she'd told me about her divorce, her kids, and had her wallet out showing me pictures of them. Also, I could tell she was Roman Catholic by her rosary (yeah, odd, I know).

[Eug]

^^^
How about another scenario...

Two equally "needy" people. Both are equally qualified, and both have good references. One is visibly pregnant, and the other one isn't.

The job is a temp job for 6 months, possibly becoming permanent.

Who do you hire?

Now, let's say the pregnant one is slightly more qualified, but the non-pregnant one is qualified enough and seems more than capable of doing the job.

Who do you hire?

[ort888]

The cuter one.

[Shaddim]

I'd hire the pregnant one, and get her on insurance ASAP.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by ort888 

The cuter one.

Both are equally cute, but one has a rounder pregnant belly.

Who do you hire?

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I'd hire the pregnant one, and get her on insurance ASAP.

Why? Are you talking about if she's equally qualified, or if she's slightly more qualified?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Eug 

^^^
How about another scenario...

Two equally "needy" people. Both are equally qualified, and both have good references. One is visibly pregnant, and the other one isn't.

The job is a temp job for 6 months, possibly becoming permanent.

Who do you hire?

Now, let's say the pregnant one is slightly more qualified, but the non-pregnant one is qualified enough and seems more than capable of doing the job.

Who do you hire?

Makes no difference. Everyone working for Doof is set-up as a self-employed contractor. Kinda gets around all that maternity leave stuff.

[BigBadWolf]

Yes, you are a despicable racist. And the worst kind, one who panders to the race because of perceived notions of one race being lesser than the other (you stated that the white man would be able to find a job, but the black women would not). I hope that you someday get caught for this and end up with a discrimination suit.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Why? Are you talking about if she's equally qualified, or if she's slightly more qualified?

either.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by BigBadWolf 

Yes, you are a despicable racist. And the worst kind, one who panders to the race because of perceived notions of one race being lesser than the other (you stated that the white man would be able to find a job, but the black women would not). I hope that you someday get caught for this and end up with a discrimination suit.

There ya go, that's the spirit! Glad to see that some people around here still know how to flame someone.


BTW, I was right, he was able to find a job more quickly. Don't let that stop you, though.

[Dakar V]

Looks like Shaddim isn't afraid of the Big Bag Wolf.

No, that's ok, I can find the door myself.

[BigBadWolf]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Don't let that stop you, though.

It won't.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Recently a position opened up in one of my companies. Usually I get very excited about this because I love hiring people. Yeah, I usually overpay and spoil my employees, but I expect a great deal from them, so I believe it balances out. Anyway, it came down to two people who were both equally qualified and motivated. Well, almost, but I'll get into that later.

Candidate #1 is a black lady, she's a single (divorced) mother with two children.

Candidate #2 is a white male, single, raising a 3 y/o daughter.

After thinking about it for almost a week, I chose the woman. The sticking point, I think the guy has a bit more experience and would require a little less supervision in the beginning. I suppose I'm a bit ashamed to admit it, but I largely chose her because I think it would be easier for the white guy to find employment elsewhere and I wanted to give the lady an opportunity. So, the truth is, if I weren't aware of the color of their skin I likely would have picked him. Kim said that I "did the right thing" but this really bothers me.

Thoughts? Opinions?

The way I see it, you gave the opportunity to a woman with two children over a man with one child.

That's not racist, that is sexist!

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

The way I see it, you gave the opportunity to a woman with two children over a man with one child.

That's not racist, that is sexist childrenist!

Fixinatednessish.

[osiris]

I would've hired a robot, or at least shipped the job overseas.

JUST KIDDING.

[andi*pandi]

Originally Posted by Eug 

^^^
How about another scenario...

Two equally "needy" people. Both are equally qualified, and both have good references. One is visibly pregnant, and the other one isn't.

The job is a temp job for 6 months, possibly becoming permanent.

Who do you hire?

Now, let's say the pregnant one is slightly more qualified, but the non-pregnant one is qualified enough and seems more than capable of doing the job.

Who do you hire?

It would be illegal, yet extremely common, to hire the non-pregnant candidate.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I think the guy has a bit more experience and would require a little less supervision in the beginning. I suppose I'm a bit ashamed to admit it, but I largely chose her because I think it would be easier for the white guy to find employment elsewhere and I wanted to give the lady an opportunity.

By that logic, you should always hire the less-qualified candidate(s), because the more qualified ones will have an easier time getting jobs elsewhere, simply by virtue of being more qualified

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

By that logic, you should always higher the less-qualified candidate(s), because the more qualified ones will have an easier time getting jobs elsewhere, simply by virtue of being more qualified

read the thread again.

[mattyb]

I've got two kids. If that woman can hold down full-time employment (whats that 40 hours per week in the US?) and look after two kids, then she's got her head screwed on right.

Not sure what job they'll do, but its doubtful that either of them could travel or stay over night to visit a client for example.

As an aside, the make-up of the team that a person will work in/with does make a difference when picking someone. Can you see that person working alongside others who are already there? Will this new person try and take over?

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Tomchu 

Did "neediness" factor at all into your decision process?

I would have considered the fact that the person raising two kids is going to be needier than the person raising one kid -- thus leading to missed days of work, "going home early" because of some child-related emergency, etc. From what I've seen and heard, parents of young kids generally try to milk the system and think they deserve some special treatment from their employers.

Actually, I think the "neediness" factor is more insidious than the "racism" factor. If we start making decisions based on who "needs" it more, we're in real trouble.

That said, you're still a racist and a sexist. See how easy it is? Affirmative action is racist, too, but it's even worse b/c it's done by GOVT.