Google Joins Firms Dropping Diversity Recruitment Goals

[naomi24]

//Google has become the latest big US firm to scrap its goals to recruit more workers from underrepresented groups, BBC News understands.

The decision to abandon the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) recruitment targets comes after the company carried out an annual review of its corporate policies.

The technology giant is also reviewing some of its other DEI programmes.

US President Donald Trump and his allies have regularly attacked DEI policies. Since his return to the White House just over two weeks ago, Trump has ordered government agencies to eliminate such initiatives.//

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3rw3e5je5po

 

It seems it just needed someone with the courage to say it like it is and start the ball rolling.  Let's hope the rest of the western world follows suit.

[Untitled]

why does this please you?

[sandyRoe]

?si=heYO4B3katInaiu-

[naomi24]

People should be recruited on ability alone.   Why does that displease you?

[albaqwerty]

Employing people on merit seems to be a radical idea for some, for others it's common sense.

[naomi24]

Indeed, Alba.  Discrimination appears to be acceptable in some circumstances.

[barry1010]

I agree, people should be recruited on ability alone but applications shouldn't be binned just because somebody is disabled, or old/young or because of the colour of their skin.

 

[youngmafbog]

Merit based recruitment and promotion is the only way forward. Anything else is discriminatory and certainlyb not Equality which DEI proponents claim to want to promote.

All DEI does is weaken a company, undermine those "DEI" who have made it on merit and cause division.  Ludicrous policy.

[youngmafbog]

And neither should they be binned because they are a white middle aged male Barry.

[naomi24]

^Not to mention costing a fortune.

[brainiac]

Exactly, barry - DEI means that some applications are binned because of the colour of applicants' skins - white applicants.

That cannot be right, can it?

[Untitled]

because i think without a specified effort to support under represented groups which have had generational disadvantages then they will remain under represented. 

[New Judge]

Which groups would these be in (say) the NHS?

[Untitled]

the USA doesn't have an NHS

[Old_Geezer]

Better late than never.

Best of all if never having joined the bandwagon.

[jackthehat]

Most DEI programmes have not been fit for purpose. They have resulted in people filling roles which they have proven to be manifestly unsuitable and created an imblance in true representation of society.

[albaqwerty]

"Under represented groups" can get there, wherever there is, on merit.

[Khandro]

n. Your link is to the BBC, perhaps they may soon follow suit .

Rod Liddle (whom God preserve) once opined that if the Beeb really wanted the make up of their staff to be in line with the diversity of British society, they'd have to start by firing a lot of homosexuals. 😄 

[New Judge]

"...the USA doesn't have an NHS"

I know the President's edict only applies to the USA, but I though you were talking generally rather than specifically about that country.

[naomi24]

It seems major companies have taken a lead from Mr Trump but are scrapping this of their own volition - and their offices are not confined to the USA.  Many operate all over the world and if this is now company policy, then that's what it is regardless of their whereabouts.

[Untitled]

that's actually not always the case.