Wanting to hire ‘fewer white men’ for a job is not discrimination

The Telegraph ^ | 12/19/2023

[Altura Ct.]

Wanting to hire “fewer white men” for a job is not discrimination, a tribunal has ruled.

Chris Palmer was turned down from an £80,000 post at a financial services company, who instead opted to hire a woman, after he was told at his job interview the company wanted to hire fewer white men.

At an employment tribunal, the candidate said his failure to get the position as head of HR was based on his ethnicity and gender following the remark from Michael Jones, the managing director.

However the panel dismissed his claims – ruling it was not “indicative of an intention to discriminate” when an employer mentioned its aim to improve diversity in its workforce.

Tamara Lewis, the judge presiding over the tribunal, said that although an organisation may aspire to be “less dominated by white men”, it does not mean that there is an “intention to achieve that objective by discriminating in recruitment against white men and in favour of women or minority ethnic candidates”.

[Altura Ct.]

As long as Whites refuse to organize and stand up for themselves, they will continue to disenfranchise and discriminate.

[Tell It Right]

Businesses will hate the day that they have few whites ... all while the Dims are teaching blacks not to “act white”.

[Reno89519]

So, hiring fewer non-white men is also okay? Where does this BS stop?

[Regulator]

So in what used to be England (land of the Angles), discrimination is not discrimination.

Got it.

So what they just said is that companies are also free to “want to hire fewer non-white men”.

Goose, Gander...

[cgbg]

If you want to increase the percentage of whites in your workforce that is racism.

If you want to decrease the percentage of whites in your workforce that is not racism.

Lol.

[Billthedrill]

Tamara Lewis, the judge presiding over the tribunal, said that although an organisation may aspire to be “less dominated by white men”, it does not mean that there is an “intention to achieve that objective by discriminating in recruitment against white men and in favour of women or minority ethnic candidates”.

If they come right out and tell you so, there is. Possibly we could with one less female judge.

[cgbg]

Whites have the same issue that the Jews had in 1930s Germany—too many enemy collaborators.

[Right Brother]

White society has been cleverly guilted into submission.

[Skywise]

There you have it people - racism is alive and well AND approved of by our elitists.

[Sgt_Schultze]

HR is a position created to employ black females. Many large companies put the HR VP as a board member to create a black female presence there too. Tokenism does nothing to assist the perception of run-of-the-mill minority employees.

[cgbg]

The raw evil we are dealing with becomes clearer with a simple substitution.

Their version:

“although an organisation may aspire to be “less dominated by white men”, it does not mean that there is an “intention to achieve that objective by discriminating in recruitment against white men and in favour of women or minority ethnic candidates”.

Now try it this way:

“Although an organisation may aspire to be “less dominated by Jews” it does not mean that there is an “intention to achieve that objective by discriminating in recruitment against Jews in favor or women or minority ethnic candidates.”

[Wuli]

I had a diverse staff when I ran an IT department.

I never sought that diverse result as any kind of goal.

I only always made sure my net was cast wide enough that I was not discriminating in my search and always open to the candidate I thought was most qualified on all background and technical merits.

True diversity does not have to discrimnate in favor of some arbitrary diverse goal.

[Flaming Conservative]

There is apparently no longer a concept of honor, justice, or truth in the UK.

[Alberta's Child]

I question the mental stability and intelligence of any white man who applies to an HR director position.

[eeriegeno]

So would it be discriminatory to advertise that the work force would be increased but only by white men? IMHO same thing, opposite words.....

[PGalt]

Content of character ALERT!

[Jonty30]

What is often missed by the artificial goal of diversity is that allowing people to do their best is going to raise boats for everybody in terms of an enjoyable life and opportunity.

I don’t ministering to those who are disadvantaged to try and get them to do better than they might otherwise, but it’s not ideal to impose diversity because that comes at the expense of productivity.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

“Where does this BS stop?”

When 12% of the population has 100% control of the country. That’s when.

[CodeToad]

Would, “I am waiting to hire non-racists who do not want to wait to hire fewer whites”, be called racism or just anti-liberalism?

[cgbg]

Many white collar jobs these days require teams that work very closely together.

Compatibility among team members as well as having true subject matter experts are critical to success.

Playing “skin color” games is sabotaging the team and the enterprise.

Before I retired all members of our team were subject matter experts in some element of our enterprise.

There were a few black people there but they had earned it. To be blunt a couple of them were not as smart as the rest of the members of the team. That just meant they had to work harder to keep up—and they did so without complaint.