Note: I’m not American, so I wan’t to make sure I understand it correctly.
From my understanding it is kinda like, if 20% of people you can hire are e.g. African-Americans but less than that is being hired due to racism, DEI is there to ensure that actually 20% of people being hired are African-Americans. Is this accurate?
Comments
Diversity, equality, inclusivity.
Basically hiring people from different backgrounds. The problem is that sometimes policies following this hire someone less qualified for the job just to say they are diverse.
DEU is when you hire people who are completely unqualified, by dint of their race, gender, or religion, as opposed to white frat bros who are automatically better qualified for the position by their superior race, gender,and religion. In other words, it’s the new cowards’ way of screeching “DEYTOOKERJERBS!!”
No.
DEI says that you can’t consider the fact that the candidate is African-American at all. If you take that out of the equation, then the hired candidates’ demographics should, eventually, align naturally with that of the available labor pool.
It’s not necessarily a hard number of people from certain backgrounds. It is a concept. You are intentionally hiring people to have a mix of ethnicities, background, gender, etc. and also ensuring that folks from these backgrounds are being promoted so that all levels of your company are diverse.
There are arguments that by doing this, you are not hiring and promoting the most talented people. Instead, you are just hiring somebody to “check a box” because they are of a different ethnicity than others in the office. There are also arguments that by having more diversity, your company grows in a different and better way since there are more perspectives that go into the work that gets done.
It really isn’t anything.
It’s like a HR corpo speak for trying to take into account all candidates possible and trying not to be racist. That’s it. There are no hard rules or anything.
Anyways the entire Trump presidency considers DEI to be anti white racism. Anything to do with anything that isn’t white or male is DEI and worthy of them attacking and stopping.
Just mentioning black peoples or women is DEI to them.
I can see this going down a vile path already. Broadly you’re right, in an equitable world, your workforce would reflect your populous. There are multiple ways to facilitate hiring from groups which have been historically excluded which rarely to never involve giving a less qualified person a position. Be strong as you read through the inevitable comments which say otherwise.
It’s a badge for virtue-signalers to make them feel morally superior to themselves.
Not at all.
Where we are at now: government funds to protect pregnant women from abuse are beung slashed by calling it DEI. Pictures of black war heroes are removed from historical websites by calling it DEI.
How we got here:
Most corporate DEI policies are centered around inclusion and equity. As in working to make all employeed feel welcome.
This can include providing training to employeed intended to reduce and prevent harassment. Racism, sexism, and homophobia used to be the norm. It used to be common to conduct work meetings in strip clubs (still is in a few lines of work). DEI policies generally work to improve diversity by reducing the rate minoritized employees were pushed out of workplaces.
The far right has taken these efforts and intentionally misrepresented them as the type of quota filling you are thinking of. Suggesting that every professional black person is unqualified because they are only there to fill nonexistant quotas. It turns out we have a word already for assuming a person is bad based on their race: racism.
Creating the straw-man of DEI is just an excuse for their racism.