atw: Re: Discrimination
- From: Bob Trussler <bob.trussler@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 21:13:14 +1000
Peter,
You could add
+ lack of experience AND EDUCATION which leads to LOW productivity.
Examples are
- not knowing that a word processor can generate a table of contents
- not knowing that a word processor works better when using styles
- not knowing that a word processor can generate a bulleted list (and a
two-column table is just a plain silly and clunky work-around)
- not knowing that a word processor can generate a numbered list.
- not knowing how to correct or work-around a stuffed up numbered list.
- not knowing how to set tabs
- not knowing how to set indents
- being able to do lots of things in Dreamweaver, but having no idea how to
edit HTML code
Need I go on!
I am not making this up.
Bob T
On 30 April 2013 11:08, Peter Martin <prescribal@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sunday, April 28, 2013, David Crosswell wrote:
>
>> On 28/04/13 16:23, Christine Kent wrote:
>>
>> The reality for many on this list is that we are getting old, and it is
>> futile to ignore that age is a very significant factor in overall
>> discrimination patterns, at least as significant as gender or race.
>> However, those of us who know very well that discrimination is a major
>> factor in employment patterns never dare discuss it in a public forum
>> because none of us wants to admit that we may be having trouble getting
>> enough work.
>>
>>
>>
>> How do we counter whichever discrimination we are facing? In my case it is
>> age and to a lesser extent, gender. For all of us it is price, whether that
>> is the employment of juniors as "good enough" or offshoring. With so much
>> of our work being outsourced to India, we are facing a very real issue.
>>
>>
>> This is true, but it needs more analysis than just identification.
>>
>>
>
>> With the `age' factor, there are three aspects in a potential employer's
>> mind:
>>
>> - staid inflexibility. Which may be a reality and quite often is. Can
>> an employer afford to pay out for the time to discover whether s/he has an
>> exception to the rule on this occasion?
>> - experience. Which has to be paid for.
>> - over qualified. And is this person going to content to stay for
>> longer than an initial period, even if they have no other market option?
>>
>> Outsourcing is a market strategy to drop the local price.
>> Not all work can be. Especially not work that needs to be constantly
>> referenced with SMEs.
>> Not all of that can be done via the 'Net.
>> Cheers!
>>
>> David
>>
>> Of course one might also suggest that a probably-incompetent employer
> might also have three similar aspects (aka stereotyes) in mind for younger
> applicants in the "age" factor category
>
> + lack of attention span, likelihood of worktime lost through
> alcohol excesses and sickies. Can exceptions be detected?
> + lack of experience which leads to mistakes resulting in loss of
> productivity
> + under qualified. Is this person going to be employable without
> requiring excessive damage or supervision?
>
> Incompetent and dishonest managers and employers might use silly
> stereotypes in just about any direction... including race, sex and
> religious discrimination. They're incompetent because their criteria
> based on stereotyping are not merely inefficient as recruiting practice
> (let's leave aside morality for the present) but also risk some
> nasty consequences. The reality is, of course, that these silly
> stereotypes are most likely to be applied when work opportunities are
> shrinking.
>
> But the answer is not, as you appear to suggest, to find a way for
> people to pretend they're not black or for them to meekly just head off and
> find jobs "suitable" for black people. (s/black/aged s/aged/young)
>
> And having set aside the morality briefly, let's take it into account
> here. If employers and managers get benefits in their business from the
> rule of law (as they all do) they might consider a requirement to
> follow obligations under that system, like obeying the law.
>
> Might it not be slightly relevant in here somewhere that the practices you
> suggest are involved for employers are actually ILLEGAL?
>
> The laws are weak in application, as equality laws were in the world of
> the Alabamas. So the laws need to be strengthened. Governments,
> employers who bleat about baby boomers being a drag on the economy need to
> have it pointed out to them that failure to strengthen and enforce the
> law and failures to obey it are within their areas of responsibility.
>
> If they want us to keep off their welfare system and stop being a drain on
> superannuation funds, there's a simple answer: do what you say you have
> a responsibility to do: avoid discrimination, and allow us to work, raising
> the barriers that prevent us from doing it.
>
> No, stuff it! All these arguments that I should just go quietly to the
> back of the bus are unacceptable.
>
> -PeterM
>
>
>
>
>
--
Bob Trussler
Other related posts:
