Why Why Why?? give them chance!!

[Arhob1]

I'm assuming that you were born perfect in every single way, and that you did not need to learn anything whatsoever, i.e. within your first job from leaving school/college you knew exactly what was required of you, giving you that extra footfall into the door with absolute knowledge of every single aspect of your new position.

Everyone has to start somewhere.

The OP is far from excusing poor standards. Excellence is a reward we reap when we've learned from our mistakes, even when making mistakes can we excel in our work, giving our customers the knowledge that when we bugger things up, we're willing to make things right.

It is those that consider their work to be perfect right from the very start that leave themselves open to ridicule when they create an issue.

No I am FAR from perfect. But neither am I asking for others (like me) to be given a break. Sorry life is not like that, you have to make your own breaks. I will always pick the best all round applicant.

I remember at age 22 a senior manager calling me in to his office and spending 30 minutes completely pulling apart every word of a letter I had written.... and quite rightly so. I learnt more about English in those 30 minutes than in 16 years of schooling.

I am eternally grateful for that 30 minutes of humiliating and embarrassing time as I would not be where I am today were it not for that.

The bloke who did it was a retired "old school" Colonel who drove standards up. Despite my blushes he drove my standards up. I am thankful to him that he didn't just think to himself "I'll give him a break" and thereby leave me languishing in my low standards.

So to me ignoring low standards is not for the long term good of the individual, particularly those who want to improve themselves.

Horses for courses, some of us want to continually improve ourselves and not to be given well meaning but ultimately damaging "breaks".

 

[hmmm]

soooooooooooo anyway





has anyone got any jobs going then or what?

 

No I am FAR from perfect. But neither am I asking for others (like me) to be given a break. Sorry life is not like that,

Well in my life I have been given many breaks and help by various people as have most of the people I know.

Pretty sure it was not because of me good looks.

You must live in a bleak unforgiving world?

Earl

 

[Consistency]

I think they'll still manage to sleep at night knowing this...

For now...............

but when they get the bill for a speak and spell training programmes and customers are complaining about dealing with a thicko and want a real response in real time with a real person who is on a real planet, their 40 winks may be reduced to 30 when their reputation and finances suffer.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

No I am FAR from perfect. But neither am I asking for others (like me) to be given a break. Sorry life is not like that, you have to make your own breaks. I will always pick the best all round applicant.

I remember at age 22 a senior manager calling me in to his office and spending 30 minutes completely pulling apart every word of a letter I had written.... and quite rightly so. I learnt more about English in those 30 minutes than in 16 years of schooling.

I am eternally grateful for that 30 minutes of humiliating and embarrassing time as I would not be where I am today were it not for that.

The bloke who did it was a retired "old school" Colonel who drove standards up. Despite my blushes he drove my standards up. I am thankful to him that he didn't just think to himself "I'll give him a break" and thereby leave me languishing in my low standards.

So to me ignoring low standards is not for the long term good of the individual, particularly those who want to improve themselves.

Horses for courses, some of us want to continually improve ourselves and not to be given well meaning but ultimately damaging "breaks".

Exactly my point!

You Learned something from someone within your working years. Get people through your door, and then mould them into how you want them to work, don't expect someone to waltz through your door knowing every little trade secret who won't make a fatal mistake, it won't happen.

 

[internetspaceships]

Yeah Access but it brings us full circle on the discussion.

Given 10 applicants for one job.
6 submit an articulate application form.
4 don't.

You're looking to interview say 5 - so where do the 4 end up?

I'll tell you where- in the rejection pile.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

Yeah Access but it brings us full circle on the discussion.

Given 10 applicants for one job.
6 submit an articulate application form.
4 don't.

You're looking to interview say 5 - so where do the 4 end up?

I'll tell you where- in the rejection pile.

Ah, but now we're into the "application form" scenario. For me that's a big difference than receiving someone's CV.

Assuming that you mean that the 4 that don't submit an application form, over 4 that don't submit an articulate application form, then yes I agree, if they can't be bothered to fill out a form at all then granted, we can only assume that they are not really interested in the position that is on offer to them.

However, let's say for instance one of those people are Dyslexic, they fill out a form as best to their capabilities would you really disregard them for a position within your company, knowing that they're Dyslexic or would you give them that chance to prove their worth?

 

[Consistency]

Ah, but now we're into the "application form" scenario. For me that's a big difference than receiving someone's CV.

Assuming that you mean that the 4 that don't submit an application form, over 4 that don't submit an articulate application form, then yes I agree, if they can't be bothered to fill out a form at all then granted, we can only assume that they are not really interested in the position that is on offer to them.

However, let's say for instance one of those people are Dyslexic, they fill out a form as best to their capabilities would you really disregard them for a position within your company, knowing that they're Dyslexic or would you give them that chance to prove their worth?

There are certain jobs that are NOT suitable for a dyslexic. It was a disaster when I gave one a chance. Would you trust a prescription to be dispensed by a dyslexic pharmacist?

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

There are certain jobs that are NOT suitable for a dyslexic. It was a disaster when I gave one a chance. Would you trust a prescription to be dispensed by a dyslexic pharmacist?

Oh I agree, there are almost certainly jobs out there that would not be suitable, but likewise there are jobs out there that would be best suited to surely?

Are employers out there giving the chance to those that crave or really need a job, or are they being rejecting straight away simply because they're not as articulate as the lazy so n so who thinks he knows everything that walked through the doors an hour earlier?

Quick example:

Employee no1.

This employee is willing to work over time as and where needed, is helpful to other staff, willing to pitch in whenever he's finished his workload, stays late just to ensure other people he works with have completed their work, jumps on picking and packing of orders and moves from one area to the next just to help out.

Dave is 34, suffers from Depression and Dyslexia, but wants to make sure his wife and kids are happy, he wants to please everyone around him and keep his job, he's not daft, he just can't read nor write. He left school at 13 with no GCSE's

Employee no2.

This employee sticks to his time sheet, is never late but leaves on time for lunch, and in the evening is the first to leave. Sticks to his own area of work and makes sure it lasts for the entire day, even though he could probably do it in half the time if he wanted to and never helps the people he works with.

Mike is 34, suffers from Chronic brown tongue and is very articulate, he takes his time with his workload because he's not daft, he's "working" the company. He left with 9 GCSE's, went to College and has 4 A levels.

 

[Consistency]

Oh I agree, there are almost certainly jobs out there that would not be suitable, but likewise there are jobs out there that would be best suited to surely?

Are employers out there giving the chance to those that crave or really need a job, or are they being rejecting straight away simply because they're not as articulate as the lazy so n so who thinks he knows everything that walked through the doors an hour earlier?

Quick example:

Employee no1.

This employee is willing to work over time as and where needed, is helpful to other staff, willing to pitch in whenever he's finished his workload, stays late just to ensure other people he works with have completed their work, jumps on picking and packing of orders and moves from one area to the next just to help out.

Dave is 34, suffers from Depression and Dyslexia, but wants to make sure his wife and kids are happy, he wants to please everyone around him and keep his job, he's not daft, he just can't read nor write. He left school at 13 with no GCSE's

Employee no2.

This employee sticks to his time sheet, is never late but leaves on time for lunch, and in the evening is the first to leave. Sticks to his own area of work and makes sure it lasts for the entire day, even though he could probably do it in half the time if he wanted to and never helps the people he works with.

Mike is 34, suffers from Chronic brown tongue and is very articulate, he takes his time with his workload because he's not daft, he's "working" the company. He left with 9 GCSE's, went to College and has 4 A levels.

Employee 1 deserves a chance.
Employee 2 deserves a smack.

 

[Consistency]

I know a man at a local supermarket who collects the trolleys. It needs no qualifications, needs no previous experience but still requires an amount of dedication and timekeeping. There are a lot of people when shopping who just leave their trolleys in car parking spaces or in the middle of the driving areas rather than returning them to the trolley points. They simply do not care. These same people soon care when they can't get to a space because of trolleys in the way.

This collector is slow and I think he would need a lot of help with a lot of things BUT he is as good at that job as anyone could possibly be. I only know that people leave trolleys in awkward places because I witness it. HE witnesses this also and he really keeps watch and keeps the car park clear. Many would see this as beneath them but he loves his job. He is reliable and friendly and always a smile. There is no reason he should not have that job from what I can see. He does it in the most terrential rain when people leave trolleys in the car park as they just want to get in their car and go home. He is a diamond at that job and I do see people treating him like rubbish. Cleaners get treated like rubbish as well, yet office bimbos and burkes would not know what to do if they turned up for "work" and found there desk how they left it.

Would I give him a job - it would very much depend on what it was. Some of the jobs even those that are seemingly mundane include having to write handwritten reports. These must be clear and reasonable. I would love to give him a chance though.

Some of the other work that he could do may be only temporary and I would fear a discrimination case, should it be found he was not quite suitable. It would not be as easy as "he just can't take it in or we now have this bit of extra work and he is not able to adapt, we would have to re-employ someone else as well as him or make him redundant and go through a stupid selection process etc."

Employment law is preventing employers giving people a chance who would otherwise perhaps get one. This is grossly unfair on the employer and the employee. In a meritocratic employment order then we would be able to employ who could do the job, give a chance to those who may be able to do the job and get rid of the ones who cannot do the job. Some people think that is how it is now, but while we have that list of vulnerables - disabled, women, gay/lesbian, dyslexic, mentally ill, pregnant etc etc then fair employment law is a contradiction in terms.

 

[Employment Law Clinic]

Employee 1 deserves a chance.
Employee 2 deserves a smack.

For a moment there you were talking some sense Connie. I even came close to agreeing with you (not quite, but close )

And then...

Some of the other work that he could do may be only temporary and I would fear a discrimination case, should it be found he was not quite suitable. It would not be as easy as "he just can't take it in or we now have this bit of extra work and he is not able to adapt, we would have to re-employ someone else as well as him or make him redundant and go through a stupid selection process etc."

Employment law is preventing employers giving people a chance who would otherwise perhaps get one. This is grossly unfair on the employer and the employee.

This is grossly unfair on Parliament, the employment tribunals, and this potential employee as it's only your head-in-the-sand ignorance towards employment law that is preventing you employing this person.


You "would fear a discrimination case...". If only you could hire someone on a probationary period, which of course you can't as it's prevented only by Part Connie, Section 0, Blissful Ignorance Act.

Get real Connie, the law isn't preventing you from giving this person a chance, you're just hiding behind the law to justify your actions (or lack of them).



Karl Limpert

 

[Consistency]

It is through exprience of giving a person who was challenged some way that I learned I had made a mistake in giving him a chance in the first place. We got him to do a writing test beforehand and we agreed he could take his time when he writes, nice and slow so that he could get it right. He could do it properly when allowed extra time to do so. He never declared his dyslexia beforehand and only told us he had "suspected dyslexia" which was mentioned at school. He played this to his advantage and was making a right mess of official documents that was part of the job. He could write ok when he needed to and was good enough for the amount of paperwork he had to do. As time went on his writing got worse and unreadable like he just did not give a poop.

He was taking the rise good and proper and ringing in sick at the last minute and so on and so forth and when we asked him about it even put his getting tired while driving down to his dyslexia.

He never mentioned this to us and he was clearly unsuitable. On speaking to our solicitor he told us we could making him redundant, which meant we could not offer that job to anyone else or we could dismiss him but would have to be very very careful as he could say we were discriminating against his dyslexia.

This was very sad indeed and thought it grossly unfair. We

 

[Parthelan]

Some of the other work that he could do may be only temporary and I would fear a discrimination case, should it be found he was not quite suitable. .

Are you even an employer? :| You dont seem to have the first clue about anything to do with employment law, and jump into every thread on staffing issues or employment issues to biatch and whinge and rub salt on that chip on your shoulder.

Seriously, just get a job in mcdonalds and be done with it

 

[Parthelan]

Get real Connie, the law isn't preventing you from giving this person a chance, you're just hiding behind the law to justify your actions (or lack of them).

A less charitable and kindly person than myself might even think it's a nice little cover for all sorts of prejudices and bigotry, looking at his views on pregnant women, homosexuals, women and disabled people in the workplace etc....

 

[Consistency]

A less charitable and kindly person than myself might even think it's a nice little cover for all sorts of prejudices and bigotry, looking at his views on pregnant women, homosexuals, women and disabled people in the workplace etc....

If you look closely you will see that I actually belief in equality. The equality that gives the White, straight, sane, literate, Male who can walk and talk without special assistance a chance. This person is now the underdog and it is wrong - of course that is not your type of equality.

There are enough examples reported where employment law is absolutely ridiculous and these are a small amount of examples - there was one recently where a woman was depressed, lied on her application form and was a great deal amount of money and she was set for life. She was a criminal and yet rewarded. Crime pays - especially if you are "special".

Equality should be for all. The special list should be scrapped.

 

[hmmm]

If you look closely you will see that I actually belief in equality. The equality that gives the White, straight, sane, literate, Male who can walk and talk without special assistance a chance. This person is now the underdog and it is wrong - of course that is not your type of equality.

There are enough examples reported where employment law is absolutely ridiculous and these are a small amount of examples - there was one recently where a woman was depressed, lied on her application form and was a great deal amount of money and she was set for life. She was a criminal and yet rewarded. Crime pays - especially if you are "special".

Equality should be for all. The special list should be scrapped.

could you say the last bit again i couldnt grasp what you ment.or am i eliterate {is that spelt right?}

 

[trebor8]

Just wanted to drop in on this thread and let people know that we're looking into the points raised and if there are any solutions we can offer to help both improve the experience for younger / work-seeking users and also protect the areas of the site that are reserved for other topics If you have any suggestions or queries, feel free to add them here or get in touch via PM / email.

Maybe a good time to give them a platform on these forums - Heading: Young Business Minds(?)
- encouraging young entrepreneurial spirit

I'm sure there'll be some creative minds bursting at the seams with ideas and we might find a few golden nuggets

 

[papverpoppies]

Some time ago I worked with a thalidomide victim.

If I tell you that Doreen arms/hands basically ended at her elbows, and she had problems walking (she could walk) but not fast - some of you would probably dismiss her as unemployable.

I met her when I first went to work in the hotels, she was domestic/waitress in a large quest house (some 60 people) so a busy spot.

Doreen could do what all of us so called able bodies people could do, and always had a cheerful disposition.

You have NO idea what someone can and cannot do, just on face value.
I know plenty of so called able bodied people who seem not to be able to work, so I hate people discriminating on the grounds of disability.

When I first started work there was a young man (about 25ish) who had, had a stroke, he had taught himself to write with his left hand, his speech was slow, but he could manage the job ( a records clerk) good and well, and luckily the company saw that.

These things could and will happen to ALL of us one day, and we, will then, become the discriminated against.

Connie how will you feel then?

Poppy ~xx~

 

[Consistency]

Some time ago I worked with a thalidomide victim.

If I tell you that Doreen arms/hands basically ended at her elbows, and she had problems walking (she could walk) but not fast - some of you would probably dismiss her as unemployable.

I met her when I first went to work in the hotels, she was domestic/waitress in a large quest house (some 60 people) so a busy spot.

Doreen could do what all of us so called able bodies people could do, and always had a cheerful disposition.

You have NO idea what someone can and cannot do, just on face value.
I know plenty of so called able bodied people who seem not to be able to work, so I hate people discriminating on the grounds of disability.

When I first started work there was a young man (about 25ish) who had, had a stroke, he had taught himself to write with his left hand, his speech was slow, but he could manage the job ( a records clerk) good and well, and luckily the company saw that.

These things could and will happen to ALL of us one day, and we, will then, become the discriminated against.

Connie how will you feel then?

Poppy ~xx~

I know full well that health is a blessing and I absolutely agree that as I type this I may not get to finish it as death is only a heartbeat away as well as a sudden stroke/heart attack and so on that can leave us totally with life changing circumstances.

If you do read my posts clearer, then you will see that I have never justified not employing someone such as a thalidomide victim IF she can do the job as well as someone who has not got that disability.

There are jobs that she could do and she should be given a chance BUT if the company needs to move on and adapt in order to survive then if she cannot adapt with it, then that company should not have to be punished by going through trials and tribulations to get rid of her nor have to go through the extra cost of job creation to support her in keeping the job open.

This is what has happened in the public sector. How many people are employed just to keep someone else employed who is not quite up to the job?

It supports the special ones but it is not sustainable in the long term for the public sector or the private sector.

The thalidomide should be given a chance to prove herself and if it does not work out we should be able to dismiss her without fear of discrimination cases. People such as her who may have marvellous talents are being overlooked because of how bad it can get if it goes wrong.

 

[Montaigne]

If you look closely you will see that I actually belief in equality. The equality that gives the White, straight, sane, literate, Male who can walk and talk without special assistance a chance. This person is now the underdog and it is wrong - of course that is not your type of equality.

There are enough examples reported where employment law is absolutely ridiculous and these are a small amount of examples - there was one recently where a woman was depressed, lied on her application form and was a great deal amount of money and she was set for life. She was a criminal and yet rewarded. Crime pays - especially if you are "special".

Equality should be for all. The special list should be scrapped.

<ignore>Consistency</ignore>

 

[internetspaceships]

Why ignore him for that?

You might disagree with what he says but ignoring someone you don't agree with is just silly.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

Having a difference of opinion on any matter shouldn't mean that you should ignore someone... As internetspaceships has said, it's just silly.

If everyone ignored each other on differences of opinion then were would the world be today? we certainly wouldn't be having this conversation/debate that's for sure.

 

[Montaigne]

It was a comment on his opinion rather than actually meaning I was going to ignore him :sigh

Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the post (I have been known to do this occasionally )

The way I read it is that Consistency is arguing that the demographic of white, heterosexual, able bodied, mentally sound, British male is actually the underdog in society and is oppressed by all the special interest groups that apparently abound and who are provided special treatment over and above the aforementioned individual.

How you can argue that not having to put up with racism, homophobia, sexism, chauvinism, glass ceiling etc whilst living in one of the richest countries in the world supported by a welfare state to hold you up when things get too bad is in some way being the oppressed underdog is frankly barking mad. The demographic at the top of the pile is the white educated British male, not at the bottom!

 

[internetspaceships]

Actually wasn't it reported somewhere last year that certain Councils were recruiting with emphasis placed upon the following, and in order:

Ethnic minority.
Disabled.
Female.
Male.

Which does actually leave straight white able bodied male at the bottom of the pile.

 

[JDX_John]

Actually wasn't it reported somewhere last year that certain Councils were recruiting with emphasis placed upon the following, and in order:

Ethnic minority.
Disabled.
Female.
Male.

Which does actually leave straight white able bodied male at the bottom of the pile.

I don't think that means any ethnic/etc person would automatically get hired first, only that they have a leaning towards ethnic/etc when multiple candidates meet the criteria. So perhaps a bit better, but a long way from being good.

Surely like all schemes the idea is good - to prevent negative discrimination - but it's ended up making a mockery of itself?

 

[internetspaceships]

It has because it ends up as discrimination based upon colour. Which isn't good either way around.

 

[Employment Law Clinic]

Some positive discrimination is permitted under sections 158 & 159 of the Equality Act 2010. It applies where candidates are otherwise equal, in which case the employer can (but is not obliged to) take into account the protected characteristic.

There are concerns with this law, but efforts in Parliament last year didn't get anywhere.



Karl Limpert

 

[Montaigne]

Actually wasn't it reported somewhere last year that certain Councils were recruiting with emphasis placed upon the following, and in order:

Ethnic minority.
Disabled.
Female.
Male.

Which does actually leave straight white able bodied male at the bottom of the pile.

Aren't you being a little bit disingenuous though? The discussion is whether the white male demographic is generally the underdog but you're taking one specific example to prove the point generally.

The reason such affirmative action is necessary in the first place is because of the fact that the white male in society has always been such a dominant force. You don't have campaigns to equalise the levels of pay between men and women because the men are worse paid; it's because women are treated unfairly. You have positions for ethnic minorities because they are, statistically, significantly underrepresented compared to caucasians on a like for like level. All forms of affirmative action are not designed to make any one group unequal but rather to try and level the playing field in general.

You can't seriously believe that white men are oppressed in the UK?

 

[internetspaceships]

Yes, white straight healthy males are the most under represented and under prioritised group in the country.

Take the police force as an example.

There is a female officers association.
There is a black officers association.
There is a gay officers association.
There is a disabled police officers association.

That's hardly representative of all the groups is it. Can you imagine the furore if a white male police officers association was set up?

But we do have to ask why shouldn't there be if everyone else has "associations." Where's their voice?

 

[internetspaceships]

Don't mistake me, I'm 100% with equality and equal opportunity.

However it needs to be real equality, not just papering over the cracks with political correctness.

 

[DuckingandDiving]

Yes, white straight healthy males are the most under represented and under prioritised group in the country.

...Can you imagine the furore if a white male police officers association was set up?

But we do have to ask why shouldn't there be if everyone else has "associations." Where's their voice?

What special circumstances, or special considerations, do you think white straight males would need, in the police force, that are not adequately addressed by the procedures already in place?

 

[DuckingandDiving]

Actually wasn't it reported somewhere last year that certain Councils were recruiting with emphasis placed upon the following, and in order:

Ethnic minority.
Disabled.
Female.
Male.

Which does actually leave straight white able bodied male at the bottom of the pile.

I recall when a certain building society started using black faces in their adds for mortgages. My friend noted that was the first time, in 45 years of living here, that he saw a black face being portrayed as a valid mortgage applicant in a nationawide campain. Where he lived at the time, the black and asian population was 65% but the shop fronts only every showed white faces.

 

[DuckingandDiving]

Actually wasn't it reported somewhere last year that certain Councils were recruiting with emphasis placed upon the following, and in order:

Ethnic minority.
Disabled.
Female.
Male.

I have never been to a council building where every face was a black or asian disabled females. But my local pizza place, my local mcdonalds and my local optician is entirely and exclusively asian. There are no black or white employees in any of these three private enterprizes.

 

[internetspaceships]

What special circumstances, or special considerations, do you think white straight males would need, in the police force, that are not adequately addressed by the procedures already in place?

It's not that things are not addressed, it's that all these groups are loud pressure groups with their own agendas. It's more that the voice of people NOT within these groups gets lost. Very much like the political scene where the silent majority are shouted down by the screaming minority (I use the word minority in a numerical sense as opposed to the context of minority groups)

My point is that the white straight males would need the same considerations as everyone else. No more, but no less either.

I have never been to a council building where every face was a black or asian disabled females. But my local pizza place, my local mcdonalds and my local optician is entirely and exclusively asian. There are no black or white employees in any of these three private enterprizes.

I'm not entirely sure where you're going with that one could you explain further please?

 

[DuckingandDiving]

It's more that the voice of people NOT within these groups gets lost. Very much like the political scene where the silent majority are shouted down by the screaming minority (I use the word minority in a numerical sense as opposed to the context of minority groups)

This is my question, what voice is getting lost in the police force, what is not being heard? What are white stright male police officers looking for that can not be expressed in the procedures open to them (and all) that would require of them to set up a white straight male police officers association?

My point is that the white straight males would need the same considerations as everyone else. No more, but no less either.

Are they not served by the systems already in place?

I'm not entirely sure where you're going with that one could you explain further please?

I am sorry because sometimes I do not express myself very clearly. I mean all the while we hear about councils going overbord with political correctness and how tax payers money is being used to fund black on this and asian that within the council, to the determent of white male workers, but in my local optician, mcdonals and pizza place it is exclusively asian only workers and these are private enterprizes. They will of course have an equal opportunities policy but it is very noticable there are no black or white employees in these places. The local joke is if you are not asian do not apply. In fact, the same is also true of the local bowling alley. It is not always the council that is the worst offender in employment practices.

 

[Montaigne]

Internet it's more a case that white males are the dominant culture. There is a need for a gay/asian/women's police association in order to fight for equal representation/fair treatment within the police force in general against a dominant white male culture. White officers do not need representation from an association created to ensure fair treatment against themselves.

On the other hand, in the distant future, should 98% of the police force be afro-carribean then there would be a valid reason for starting a white police officer's association.

Of course white males need to be treated equally to everyone else but overall the white male demographic is not in need of representation as it's the demographic with the most power, the highest earning potential and the most opportunities.

 

[internetspaceships]

Why on earth do they "have to fight?"

Dear God in today's society the boot is firmly on the other foot. I could understand if we were sitting here in 70's England but we're not.

 

[Montaigne]

Why on earth do they "have to fight?"

It's a turn of phrase?

Internetspaceships, your wasting you're time. Some people are so enshrined in the view that the white male is intent on putting everyone in their place that they will never change. I could write so much more but its only a while until I willl be accused of being a racist

You will only be accused of being a racist if you're being a racist.

I really don't understand how anyone can honestly believe that white heterosexual men are an oppressed and badly treated demographic!

 

[Employment Law Clinic]

Yes, white straight healthy males are the most under represented and under prioritised group in the country.

That's hardly representative of all the groups is it. Can you imagine the furore if a white male police officers association was set up?

This is a complaint I heard regularly in my previous life as a trade union rep.

What special circumstances, or special considerations, do you think white straight males would need, in the police force, that are not adequately addressed by the procedures already in place?

Not specific to the police force (or at least serving officers), but given

Some positive discrimination is permitted under sections 158 & 159 of the Equality Act 2010. It applies where candidates are otherwise equal, in which case the employer can (but is not obliged to) take into account the protected characteristic.

it could be said that there is a case for a white male association, to ensure this group are not treated less favourably:

My point is that the white straight males would need the same considerations as everyone else. No more, but no less either.

Given reports & recommendations specifically about the police, that reference may not have been the most suitable, but what InternetSpaceships described happens across interest groups.

This is my question, what voice is getting lost in the police force, what is not being heard? What are white stright male police officers looking for that can not be expressed in the procedures open to them (and all) that would require of them to set up a white straight male police officers association?

Are they not served by the systems already in place?

Of course white males need to be treated equally to everyone else but overall

... they might not be, given s.158/9 of the Equality Act.

I really don't understand how anyone can honestly believe that white heterosexual men are an oppressed and badly treated demographic!

:| I missed that argument in this thread; I only read that they don't want to be treated any more or less favourably.



Karl Limpert