cheapie

The role I currently occupy at work has a lot of potential. I've been fairly successful at my job and have demonstrated the need for a person to work for/with me. This way I can pursue activities that will bring the company very profitable business instead of spending half of my time doing administrative tasks.

My company is constantly in the pursuit of making the workforce more diverse. While I think this is good, especially considering the increasingly diverse nature of our customers, I believe they are going about it unethically.

A little over a year ago, we posted a job in my department. A fairly high-profile job that pays well. They posted the job and had some applicants. They offered a "diversity-candidate" a very nice package which she turned down.

My co-worker applied for the job and got it. He has shown himself to be more than capable and has done a TREMENDOUS job with a PITA customer. However, we found out that when he was hired, my boss was called on the carpet by the VP of XXX and chastised for hiring a white male. Additionally, I have since found out that prior to my hiring, they actively pursued certain women here in violation of posted company policy.

My dilemna is this: We posted this new job and have received an abundance of applicants. However, with the exception of one individual, only one male made it through the initial screening process, in spite of the vast majority of employees here being male. My presumption is that the interested candidates would somewhat reflect this.

We start the next round of interviews soon and I'm quite certain that the white males will not be seriously considered. In the event there is solid evidence to support this, what should I do? Notify our ethics people? Tell the interviewee? Ignore it?

Part of me would be happy that a diversity candidate will likely get the job, if only to ensure that when I go for a promotion my superiors' diversity scores will already be good.

__________________
70% of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Bob Sanders

gear02

Honestly, I think it's wrong too (btw I am a minority too, though not female) and I do understand and admire your feelings to stand up for what you think its wrong.

But in this case, I would duck and stay out of the way. You have nothing to gain and tons to lose if you cause a ruckus with your boss and VP, who seems to be determined to get minorities, regardless of if they're violating fair hiring practices. I don't think they would listen if you got in the way.

That's just my initial opinion...you have to pick your battles...

EDIT: After reading a bit more, I think if you find some evidence you should bring it up with your ethics group. I'm not entirely sure you'd be gaining anything by going directly to those in charge of hiring, and the ethics department may have more influence.

cheapie

Thanks. Part of the problem is that there ARE idiots here that would not consider women unless forced to. The nature of our industry is such that women either don't find the work interesting or haven't gotten serious consideration for position. So I understand the impetus behind the efforts.

However, in the scramble to make the situation better, I honestly believe that civil rights have been trampled on occasion. Some of the women they've put in place are seriously a waste of O2. Unbelievably inept at their jobs. And of course, there are extremely talented women that have been hired that likely would not have been w/o the push to make the situation more equitable.

gear02

That's really tough...and I too am having a problem determining what's right and what's not.

I guess my suggestion is less about ethics, and more about protecting yourself from possible and potential retaliation if you choose to open your mouth.

But now that I've typed that last sentence out, I feel a bit ashamed to say that since I believe ethics needs to be held to the highest level, above all factors.

InfiniteNothing

My gut feeling (as a minority) is that if your minority applicant statistics look like your minority employee statistics, things are going okay. Now it's fine if this is off by a bit but I think action should be taken if it swings too far one way or the other.

__________________
As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.

cheapie

if you're asian or indian then your minority status wouldn't count. i think it's only native americans, women, and african-american.

Merlin

If you are looking for an admin then don't be too surprised that most of the applicants are female. At my company every admin is a woman. It may sound sexist but in the world we live in it is a position predominantly filled by women. I realize what your company currently has might not fit the stereotype by having men in those roles but it is different in the rest of the world and as such the applicant profile for a publicly posted job will look different from what you have in house.

__________________

attgig

you're in the freakin middle of nowhere. the fact is, it's going to be hard to find a minority candidate (other than females). that sucks.

but that doesn't mean you guys gotta go the way of the nfl and fake being diverse.

__________________

cheapie

it's not an admin position.

cheapie

well, we've gone through the initial round of interviews and it seems that they are def. giving the male a fair shake. there are really only 2 women and 1 male that can really be considered for the position and any one of them would be good. i'm SOO glad i haven't had to witness any discrimination.

Merlin

My bad. I read that and jumped to a conclusion.

cheapie

hmmm.....good point. let me clarify. they will have to handle QS/TS management, represent sales and marketing to the rest of the org in product launches, manage our balanced score cards, and run all of the necessary data warehouse queries for the account teams.