|
|
Post by hypotenuse on Jun 7, 2019 21:08:40 GMT 1
Could someone tell me why the best person for the job be that male, female black or white doesn't get the job. Experience is the issue a bit like Catch 22. I do get stressed out when we start with percentages and quotas etc etc. Would you feel a worther winner if it was all about who you are rather than what you can do? No one can tell you why the best person doesn’t get the job because it isn’t true. The best person still gets the job. |
|
|
|
Post by rantinray on Jun 7, 2019 21:11:50 GMT 1
Could someone tell me why the best person for the job be that male, female black or white doesn't get the job. Experience is the issue a bit like Catch 22. I do get stressed out when we start with percentages and quotas etc etc. Would you feel a worther winner if it was all about who you are rather than what you can do? No one can tell you why the best person doesn’t get the job because it isn’t true. The best person still gets the job. Tell that to the young guy who was rejected from joining the police force because he was a white male and his father is a police inspector. The son took the force to the tribunal and was awarded damages plus a job in the police force. It happens. |
|
k1man999
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,556
|
Post by k1man999 on Jun 7, 2019 21:21:28 GMT 1
Apologies - I didn't realise that they one had to be interviewed. What a bloody stupid idea; they'll have to go collecting random ones from off the street if there are no candidates. It'll be LGBTQI candidates next. Stop the world - I want to get off.  Don’t see the problem with a bit of positive discrimination myself whilst the numbers in the jobs remains a bit skewed. I think if any apply, then at least one woman should be offered an interview too. Also over 50 year olds. Positive discrimination is still discrimination against another group. A lad who topped the interview and assessment for the cops (Cheshire) was not chosen due to being a white heterosexual male and the force had a quota to fill has successfully appealed his discrimination. He was told he was an outstanding candidate in the interview process and he couldn't have done anything more. But was overlooked as Cheshire needed to up their BAME quota despite some candidates not having the same qualifications to do the job. Equality should exist across-the-board not when it suits or to get political points. |
|
|
|
Post by hypotenuse on Jun 7, 2019 21:29:31 GMT 1
No one can tell you why the best person doesn’t get the job because it isn’t true. The best person still gets the job. Tell that to the young guy who was rejected from joining the police force because he was a white male and his father is a police inspector. The son took the force to the tribunal and was awarded damages plus a job in the police force. It happens. That is clearly illegal and not in any way related to the Rooney Rule |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2019 21:37:57 GMT 1
Give it a few years until a black candidate has been interviewed 5 times and still hasn't got a job. Or until a club has changed its manager 5 times but hasn't employed a black one. Can you imagine the accusations that will be thrown around? "Tell me Mr club chairman, you've changed managers 5 times in 3 years but still haven't employed a black man. Why is that?" Each time a club doesn't give the job to the black guy the pressure will increase to do it next time. It seemed to work perfectly well in the USA. Depends what you mean by the word 'work'. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2019 22:01:14 GMT 1
What happens if you have already pre identified your next manager before your current manager has even left as we did with Jan? Do we still have to bring John Barnes in for a chin wag?
|
|
|
|
Post by morrisraspass on Jun 7, 2019 22:04:10 GMT 1
There's nowt like a bunch of white males, who've been on the right side of the loaded dice since time immemorial, getting het up because an additional non-white candidate will now be interviewed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on Jun 7, 2019 22:10:32 GMT 1
The best candidates will be given an interview, plus an additional one who may or may not be the best candidate. You honestly think a club will end up with a manager they don't want? You may as well talk to a brick wall. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2019 22:20:14 GMT 1
There's nowt like a bunch of white males, who've been on the right side of the loaded dice since time immemorial, getting het up because an additional non-white candidate will now be interviewed. I've just had a read back through the recent posts on here but can't find any where people appear to be angry, seems to be an assumption on your part, as is the assertion that they are all white and male. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2019 22:25:54 GMT 1
There's nowt like a bunch of white males, who've been on the right side of the loaded dice since time immemorial, getting het up because an additional non-white candidate will now be interviewed. As a business owner who interviews candidates, I have got better things to do with my time than interview someone who won't get the job because he didn't qualify on merit for an interview. I wouldn't insult someone who wouldn't get the job by asking them to waste their time attending an interview & how far do they have to waste their time travelling? How many towns, counties, continents do they have to search to find a quality candidate? My X wife's interview technique fits this perfectly, female intuition, 'didn't like the look of him as he walked in the room' so she shook his hand & said thanks for coming, but your not what what were looking for, bye. Stumped me everytime she did it! By the way, I am disabled, have extremely diverse staff & had more than quota non-white etc staff over the years. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jun 8, 2019 0:13:55 GMT 1
There's nowt like a bunch of white males, who've been on the right side of the loaded dice since time immemorial, getting het up because an additional non-white candidate will now be interviewed. You can;t say... I am against racial discrimination, apart from the times when i think its ok. The way forward is to have no discrimination, not introduce more! You seem to be against people wanting a completely level playing field regardless of colour, because you presume they are white? Bit odd all round, that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2019 0:37:22 GMT 1
Don’t see the problem with a bit of positive discrimination myself whilst the numbers in the jobs remains a bit skewed. I think if any apply, then at least one woman should be offered an interview too. Also over 50 year olds. Positive discrimination is still discrimination against another group. A lad who topped the interview and assessment for the cops (Cheshire) was not chosen due to being a white heterosexual male and the force had a quota to fill has successfully appealed his discrimination. He was told he was an outstanding candidate in the interview process and he couldn't have done anything more. But was overlooked as Cheshire needed to up their BAME quota despite some candidates not having the same qualifications to do the job. Equality should exist across-the-board not when it suits or to get political points. Quotas is something different entirely. Positive discrimination to ensure under represented groups get an opportunity at least, who can argue with that other than the type of people who I'm glad get wound up by it? |
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Jun 8, 2019 5:55:52 GMT 1
There's nowt like a bunch of white males, who've been on the right side of the loaded dice since time immemorial, getting het up because an additional non-white candidate will now be interviewed. You can;t say... I am against racial discrimination, apart from the times when i think its ok. The way forward is to have no discrimination, not introduce more! You seem to be against people wanting a completely level playing field regardless of colour, because you presume they are white? Bit odd all round, that. Just out of interest ( and let's forget your ignorance about HISTORY and why positive discrimination is couched in the shameful prejudices of.our past, why a black guy getting an interview is NOT racial discrimination... Maybe go read balanced writing about WHY it is a thing then make an INFORMED opinion rather than this "offthetopofmyheadism" ) ...but anyway I digress.. just out of interest , do you remember the parliaments of the 70s n early 80s ? 600 n odd mps. Bar about 10 (thatch, betty boothroyd, babs castle and a couple of others ) each n every one a male aged 40 plus .. how was this representative of our country ? So we tried to address that as a nation with positive discrimination.. although the houses of parliament are still primarily an "old boys club" there is far greater representation of women .. so.. a few questions (seeing as though you like lobbing questions ) though feel free not to answer as I'm sure you have a life ! 1 do you understand the reasons why we were in a situation where about 1.5-2% were representing half the population? 2 Do you see any problem with that? 3 Do you think there were any other methods other than positive discrimination which would have upped the numbers at the time 4 do you think the outcome of positive discrimination, which now sees a much fairer representation of women in parliament, has been a good thing ? I'm not trying to put words in your mouth . Just trying to extract the thoughts of someone Who is seemingly soooo opposed to positive discrimination under all circumstances |
|
k1man999
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,556
|
Post by k1man999 on Jun 8, 2019 6:53:43 GMT 1
Positive discrimination is still discrimination against another group. A lad who topped the interview and assessment for the cops (Cheshire) was not chosen due to being a white heterosexual male and the force had a quota to fill has successfully appealed his discrimination. He was told he was an outstanding candidate in the interview process and he couldn't have done anything more. But was overlooked as Cheshire needed to up their BAME quota despite some candidates not having the same qualifications to do the job. Equality should exist across-the-board not when it suits or to get political points. Quotas is something different entirely. Positive discrimination to ensure under represented groups get an opportunity at least, who can argue with that other than the type of people who I'm glad get wound up by it? Y I have no issue with anyone getting an opportunity that's how it should be everyone treated as an equal human being. However when you have 2 candidates a person with qualifications that meet the required standard and a person from a minority group who falls below the criteria but gets the job because of quotas/under representation that leads to "positive discrimination" that's moraly wrong but legally fine to address the balance, but it does not represent best person for the role. Discrimination is discrimination however you want to dress it up. Positive discrimination........ in the context of the allocation of resources or employment) the practice or policy of favouring individuals belonging to groups known to have been discriminated against previously. I can only go off the experiences I have seen and encountered. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2019 10:09:40 GMT 1
Quotas is something different entirely. Positive discrimination to ensure under represented groups get an opportunity at least, who can argue with that other than the type of people who I'm glad get wound up by it? Y I have no issue with anyone getting an opportunity that's how it should be everyone treated as an equal human being. However when you have 2 candidates a person with qualifications that meet the required standard and a person from a minority group who falls below the criteria but gets the job because of quotas/under representation that leads to "positive discrimination" that's moraly wrong but legally fine to address the balance, but it does not represent best person for the role. Discrimination is discrimination however you want to dress it up. Positive discrimination........ in the context of the allocation of resources or employment) the practice or policy of favouring individuals belonging to groups known to have been discriminated against previously. I can only go off the experiences I have seen and encountered. I'd agree with you, but that's not the case with this new EFL policy. Candidates will need to have the relevant badges for the level they're at, and they'll only get the job if they're deemed best fit by the clubs. All this is, is providing a little bit of grease to the wheels to encourage black, Asian and ethic minorities to go out and apply for the jobs. I still think the pool of people is too small to be making any additions about structured racism, although I think the under representation exists of you extend out beyond first team to development and youth coaching too.. So it's likely there is something worth addressing. Although oddly the only person I directly know who has worked in a professional coaching capacity in the football league is black |
|
k1man999
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,556
|
Post by k1man999 on Jun 8, 2019 12:47:56 GMT 1
I have no issue with anyone getting an opportunity that's how it should be everyone treated as an equal human being. However when you have 2 candidates a person with qualifications that meet the required standard and a person from a minority group who falls below the criteria but gets the job because of quotas/under representation that leads to "positive discrimination" that's moraly wrong but legally fine to address the balance, but it does not represent best person for the role. Discrimination is discrimination however you want to dress it up. Positive discrimination........ in the context of the allocation of resources or employment) the practice or policy of favouring individuals belonging to groups known to have been discriminated against previously. I can only go off the experiences I have seen and encountered. I'd agree with you, but that's not the case with this new EFL policy. Candidates will need to have the relevant badges for the level they're at, and they'll only get the job if they're deemed best fit by the clubs. All this is, is providing a little bit of grease to the wheels to encourage black, Asian and ethic minorities to go out and apply for the jobs. I still think the pool of people is too small to be making any additions about structured racism, although I think the under representation exists of you extend out beyond first team to development and youth coaching too.. So it's likely there is something worth addressing. Although oddly the only person I directly know who has worked in a professional coaching capacity in the football league is black Agree encouring minority groups to actively apply is great. however forcing clubs to interview any candidate for a job that they may not be suitable for ie plays long ball instead of tica taca makes a farce of it for all, but if a club didn't interview a minority person for above then the cards come out rather than the issues of combatability. Bit like sol Campbell, comes across as a bit of a cock and seemed to feel entitled to a big job, I guess this put people off rather than ethnicity but fair play he lowered his expectations shut up and did a good job and got experience which may lead to a bigger job. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2019 12:49:31 GMT 1
^NOBODY is suggesting clubs should interview candidates for jobs they aren’t suitable or qualified for.
|
|
k1man999
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,556
|
Post by k1man999 on Jun 8, 2019 13:22:30 GMT 1
That's how it comes across.
If town sack JS and we get applicants for the job and the only minority manager who applys is Paul Ince we are obliged to give him an interview even though he fits nothing we are looking for in a manager.
I may be wrong on this particular point but that's how it reads to me and that's what I disagree about as it helps no body.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2019 13:45:00 GMT 1
That's how it comes across. If town sack JS and we get applicants for the job and the only minority manager who applys is Paul Ince we are obliged to give him an interview even though he fits nothing we are looking for in a manager. I may be wrong on this particular point but that's how it reads to me and that's what I disagree about as it helps no body. That may be how the simplified media put it across, but it’s NOT how it works, trust me! Imagine the code adopted was in place last season and applied to EPL, Hudds Town would NOT have had to interview a BAME applicant, as they didn’t run a full advertisedrecruitment process, they simply went out and got their man, which is allowed....Town ALREADY follow the rule agreed yesterday in their formal recruitment processes across first team and academy coaching roles. What most of us probably don’t realise is that Town, along with Birmingham Fulham and Wolves, were the then Championship clubs who adopted these aspects of the recruitment code now formalised into their governed working processes (across academy and first team) since back in the 2016/17 season. There is NOTHING to fear from the new rules, clubs will continue to employ whoever they think is the best applicant for them...and if the only BAME applicant has an outlook totally at odds with the direction of a club, then it’ll simply be a short interview! Rules are subtlety different for Academy level roles, but the code which has been in voluntary action this last couple of years and now becomes mandatory simply states... During the season, clubs will be expected to interview one or more BAME candidate for any First Team managerial/coaching role (where an application has been received) in instances where they run a full recruitment process.
• During the close season, clubs will be expected to run a full recruitment process for any First Team managerial/coaching role during which they must interview one or more BAME candidates (where an application has been received). |
|
k1man999
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,556
|
Post by k1man999 on Jun 8, 2019 13:57:49 GMT 1
That's how it comes across. If town sack JS and we get applicants for the job and the only minority manager who applys is Paul Ince we are obliged to give him an interview even though he fits nothing we are looking for in a manager. I may be wrong on this particular point but that's how it reads to me and that's what I disagree about as it helps no body. That may be how the simplified media put it across, but it’s NOT how it works, trust me! Imagine the code adopted was in place last season and applied to EPL, Hudds Town would NOT have had to interview a BAME applicant, as they didn’t run a full advertisedrecruitment process, they simply went out and got their man, which is allowed....Town ALREADY follow the rule agreed yesterday in their formal recruitment processes across first team and academy coaching roles. What most of us probably don’t realise is that Town, along with Birmingham Fulham and Wolves, were the then Championship clubs who adopted these aspects of the recruitment code now formalised into their governed working processes (across academy and first team) since back in the 2016/17 season. There is NOTHING to fear from the new rules, clubs will continue to employ whoever they think is the best applicant for them...and if the only BAME applicant has an outlook totally at odds with the direction of a club, then it’ll simply be a short interview! Rules are subtlety different for Academy level roles, but the code which has been in voluntary action this last couple of years and now becomes mandatory simply states... During the season, clubs will be expected to interview one or more BAME candidate for any First Team managerial/coaching role (where an application has been received) in instances where they run a full recruitment process.
• During the close season, clubs will be expected to run a full recruitment process for any First Team managerial/coaching role during which they must interview one or more BAME candidates (where an application has been received). I don't fear anything and it shouldn't possibly just apply to BAME but other minority groups aswell but that's another debate. I can see how it works in America as there are a lot more BAME coaches/managers. I don't think the percentage proportion in football is anything like and would like to think even without this rule as more minority groups finish playing and turn their skills to coaching etc they would be better represented or maybe I'm in fantasy land. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jun 8, 2019 16:41:09 GMT 1
You can;t say... I am against racial discrimination, apart from the times when i think its ok. The way forward is to have no discrimination, not introduce more! You seem to be against people wanting a completely level playing field regardless of colour, because you presume they are white? Bit odd all round, that. Just out of interest ( and let's forget your ignorance about HISTORY and why positive discrimination is couched in the shameful prejudices of.our past, why a black guy getting an interview is NOT racial discrimination... Maybe go read balanced writing about WHY it is a thing then make an INFORMED opinion rather than this "offthetopofmyheadism" ) ...but anyway I digress.. just out of interest , do you remember the parliaments of the 70s n early 80s ? 600 n odd mps. Bar about 10 (thatch, betty boothroyd, babs castle and a couple of others ) each n every one a male aged 40 plus .. how was this representative of our country ? So we tried to address that as a nation with positive discrimination.. although the houses of parliament are still primarily an "old boys club" there is far greater representation of women .. so.. a few questions (seeing as though you like lobbing questions ) though feel free not to answer as I'm sure you have a life ! 1 do you understand the reasons why we were in a situation where about 1.5-2% were representing half the population? 2 Do you see any problem with that? 3 Do you think there were any other methods other than positive discrimination which would have upped the numbers at the time 4 do you think the outcome of positive discrimination, which now sees a much fairer representation of women in parliament, has been a good thing ? I'm not trying to put words in your mouth . Just trying to extract the thoughts of someone Who is seemingly soooo opposed to positive discrimination under all circumstances My positions pretty simple ted... Im against discrimination. 'Positive' discrimination is still just discrimination. So I don;t see adding more discrimination ( ie favouring people due to race ) is the way forward. Thats my position but Im not one to hide from a question so.- 1. A very misogynistic society. 2. yes 3. Natural progression of society and changing attitudes. 4. Depends if the best people for the job are in the job. If theyre in the job for their gender or race but aren't the best for the job, then that hasn't been a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Jun 8, 2019 16:42:36 GMT 1
Yea we all know .. But you're an intelligent man who seemingly has no notion as to the rational alternative views.. Maybe seek then out then come to an informed opinion
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jun 8, 2019 16:45:59 GMT 1
You mean, 'agree with me' ?
I understand the alternative views ted. I appreciate why people would hold them.
I just don't agree.
Fair enough?
|
|
bogart
David Wagner Terrier
Posts: 2,882
|
Post by bogart on Jun 8, 2019 18:39:38 GMT 1
Why should you HAVE to interview anybody of any persuasion to satisfy a random set of rules based on purely PC rulings. I say let us make it obligatory to have to interview a 3 legged, mixed race, lesbian!
|
|
Tinpot
Mental Health Support Group
I'm really tinpot
Posts: 24,129 
|
Post by Tinpot on Jun 9, 2019 12:17:19 GMT 1
That's how it comes across. If town sack JS and we get applicants for the job and the only minority manager who applys is Paul Ince we are obliged to give him an interview even though he fits nothing we are looking for in a manager. I may be wrong on this particular point but that's how it reads to me and that's what I disagree about as it helps no body. That's my interpretation of it. In that case we have to waste the club's time & Paul Ince's time by interviewing somebody whose record since leaving MK Dons (1st spell) has been underwhelming to say the least. I think the idea is that it'll encourage more BAME people to apply for managerial jobs, and that it'll force chairmen to take BAME candidates seriously. I question whether it's necessary. Emile Heskey's missus going on the radio & saying "I think they definitely need to make more jobs available for black players and Emile would be the first there.", but he doesn't have the necessary coaching badges. Danny Rose saying there's little point in him taking the badges because he knows he won't get a chance. Andy Cole, the same. Why wouldn't he? Personally, I'm of the opinion that it's a convenient excuse & playing the race card does a disservice to them as individuals and to race relations as a whole. On the other hand, if BAME candidates are interviewed for jobs more regularly it might take that excuse away, which would be a positive step. |
|
|
|
Post by mosher on Jun 9, 2019 14:57:59 GMT 1
ALL appointments for any job should be on merit, but that's not what happens in the real world, it's no different for football.
No matter what "enabling" laws and rules are brought in, MD's or whatever will still be able to make appointments based on their own prejudices, whether that be race, age, gender, sexuality or whatever.
They'll just interview the minority/diverse applicant and STILL not employ them if they're of that mindset. |
|
|
|
Post by impact on Jun 9, 2019 15:14:10 GMT 1
ALL appointments for any job should be on merit, but that's not what happens in the real world, it's no different for football.
No matter what "enabling" laws and rules are brought in, MD's or whatever will still be able to make appointments based on their own prejudices, whether that be race, age, gender, sexuality or whatever.
They'll just interview the minority/diverse applicant and STILL not employ them if they're of that mindset. Agreed, but if 1 role is filled by a black manager who impresses, and wouldn't have otherwise got a look in, then surely it's worth it? |
|
|
|
Post by mosher on Jun 9, 2019 16:19:51 GMT 1
Agreed, it would be a good thing …
But as Slaps has stated several times NOT if a better or equally qualified non-minority applicant has been overlooked just for the sake of interviewing that BAME applicant.
This issue will always have polar opposite viewpoints, but that doesn't mean anyone against the Rooney rule is racist like some have suggested.
The fairly recent case of the white lad who sued the cops shows that in some cases this IS happening, especially in the public sector.
I personally have no problem with the Rooney rule … so long as the BAME candidate isn't REPLACING a better candidate. Interview them in addition to the others if need be.
But it's the same as any law or rule; someone somewhere will find a way round it, or some loophole.
However, does it work both ways? I've just recently left a job where I was the minority. The company I worked for was owned by Muslims and 90% of the workforce were Asian or Bosnian. Do they have to increase the percentage of their white employees? No, not from what I've experienced. |
|
|
|
Post by brianmcbrain on Jun 9, 2019 17:00:53 GMT 1
surely football works like all businesses
" i don't care about your first class degree and qualifications , i'm giving the job to my friends son "
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2019 19:23:28 GMT 1
It’s impossible to argue with the facts that there is a huge unde-representation of BAME folk in coaching or management. Not just in this country, all over Europe. I can’t think of any at the top level since Frank Rijkard left Barca. It’s way beyond a quirk of meritocracy.
Just look at where top players start out:
Giggs - Man Utd
Shearer - Newcastle
Southgate - Middlesbrough
Pearce - Forest
Gerrard - Rangers
Lampard - Derby
Ince- MK Dons (3rd tier)
Campbell - Macclesfield (92nd)
No question in my mind there is a huge unconscious bias and corrective measures are well over due.
|
|
