I saw somewhere that they are saving 5 million per year and 30 people lost their job. If you throw in the salaries, health insurance and other things, you could figure anywhere between 120K and 150K per person per year. That's almost the entire budget right there. So what are they really achieving on less than a million a year? (take the office supplies and operations out of that and it's even less).
It is very telling that we evaluate arguments on the basis of the melanin of the one making the argument and not on the merit of the argument.
At my company, for example. I really hope you're not about to argue with me that we don't promote people based on merit, and any time a white male is promoted it must be racism. Please don't do that.
No. Many of them are there because people voted based on the color of the candidate's skin (black, white or otherwise), or based on blind political party allegiance, or even because that's who some celebrity told them to vote for. The percentage of voters casting their vote based on the candidate's actual views on key issues and overall character is sadly decreasing rapidly. And of course we have people voting for a candidate based on the fact that the candidate is some sort of celebrity. So, we have what we have as a result.
I know you weren't replying to me, but I think we can hold off on insulting folks here. Personally, I HATE it when DeSantis or any other politician or business person gives an unqualified person a job just because it's their buddy. It's terrible. If you're unqualified, you shouldn't get the job. Period.
Your company must be a true anomaly, a place where people aren't hired based on connections, friendships, and networks. Let's just say I'm skeptical.
Where I worked until last Thursday. Our engineers (EIs and PEs) are 1WM, 2WF, 1TurkishM, and 1Lebanese-CanadianF. A damn good and qualified team that has one less WM since I retired. BTW, a F replaced me.
Nope, my family business also. 40+ plus years in existence, where the best employees excel. Our employees of the month are almost always black or Hispanic. Our efforts to just make it, with the help of our employees-no matter race or ethnicity, causes me to find assuming (being nice) people like yourself beyond disgusting.
Technically proficient folks with the needed education and experience were hired for technical positions without regard for their genetics. None of them, including me, had any political advantage; none, including me, were hired because they had connections - there were no connections until we all became part of the team. Seems that is the very definition of meritocracy. I am not suggesting that in other environments cronyism or prejudice isn’t a factor. I just didn’t see it in our little technically oriented sphere of influence. Maybe we are the exception, but I’m not sure why you don’t think that merit based selection doesn’t exist.
You're not the exception. Employers at every level are begging for good workers no matter affiliation, and no matter what this stuck in the past, race baiting agenda pusher types.
As I said, maybe your company is an anomaly. I don't know how big it is or how it hires. But I am skeptical that's the case. Of course, my argument isn't that merit-based selection "doesn't exist." My argument is that it's not that common, and the people who beckon to "merit" when attacking ideas they disagree with are usually full of shit. And yet, you felt the need to mention race in response to a post where I said nothing about it. How interesting. Question for you, what does "family business" mean?
Exactly what I wrote. Hoping for something? You might be disappointed. I'm warning you ahead of time.
plowing though HS with perfect score on the SAT, 4.0 GPA, 16 5’s on APs, Regeneron 1st place, and captain of his HS soccer team… rejection from UF because the metrics weighting was changed senior year… sorry, “holistic review” auto admit for engineering program with 3.75… got a 3.8, but changed the auto admit to 3.9 in year of application… sorry didn’t get in due to “holistic review” Avg yards per carry 5.75. Starting guy is 5.39… sorry “holistic review”. you sold 200 cars this year but we promoted Dave because he moved that really old car we couldn’t get off the lot… sorry “holistic review”. the pattern is that there are no two humans exactly comparable and no one can perfectly equate reward to a KPI that is accurate. It’s all just goes back to a subjective factor.
All examples of merit being overtaken by "holistic review", which (ironically) could include DEI factors. In each example the person losing out should be pissed.
No doubt what you've described happens on an exception basis, but it certainly isn't the rule. The rule is MERIT, not who you know, your gender, the color of your skin or anything else along those lines. If you're a blue-haired, transgender alien, and you're the best candidate for the job based on your job-specific skills and experience, you're hired! We know that if we don't hire you our competitors will, and we'll lose the race in the long run.
You ask for examples of the moving goal posts of meritocracy… there is no defined comparable metric — Gattaca type stuff. ETN was pissed and moved on. Did it have anything to do with DEI?
