Just heard from hr friend my bb's diversity hiring programs already being axxed
Have a close friend in HR.
My BB is already starting plans to scale back their DEI hiring initiatives as a result of the AA ruling this week. They do not want to be subject to lawsuits, and forsee another supreme court ruling that specifically calls out corporate hiring programs based on race. Last thing they want is a bunch of kids in pipeline and then supreme court does a ruling and they have to tell everyone to pound sand.
They aren't going to make any announcements about it, but the diversity hiring programs will slowly go away.
Doubt
very true
Yeah just a larp and wishcasting like other morons on here
This forum is full of virgin Incel kids who think the one black kid took their spot or the women took their spot.
They’re just mediocre
good, about time
Looool troll be like….another one thank you !
Can I get the name of your BB as a nondiversity applicant
If this is true, the bank is getting awful legal advice. There’s no risk to diversity recruiting programs.
I think it’s just a convenient excuse for firms to roll back their efforts. Coming out of school I networked with a ton of senior people who as I got to know them were pretty fed up with DEI recruiting and predicted that all of the progress that was made was going to rear it’s head and do a 180 in the near future. These guys weren’t opposed to hiring diverse candidates they just didn’t want to be told that they had to hire x number of people from a certain demographic in a given year.
While to your point nothing would likely come of a lawsuit I’m guessing these firms just want to stay out of the headlines. I would guess that some of these groups that launched this campaign would fund a handful of lawsuits regarding corporate hiring practices if they had a half decent case that came close to passing the smell test. In a hypothetical scenario for example I could see someone leaking internal documents showing a concerted effort to recruit and hire members of group x. You then take those leaks and run while pushing it out to the media like Tucker Carlson who cherry picks snippets to fit his narrative and then you’re off and running on your way to becoming the next Bud Light.
Ex’s That Stick Out From Personal Experience That Could Be Criticized Under Increased Scrutiny:
MF hires candidate for investment team from an HBCU (more than 50% acceptance rate) with no prior experience, related EC’s, and a sub 3.5 GPA
BB offered candidate IB job from elite background job after not asking technicals and not knowing the candidate failed accounting
My bank had a sophomore hiring program. Where they basically get guaranteed return offers to be summer analysts next summer. Only open to girls and latinos/blacks.
They are routinely rich white and Asian girls lol. Such a dumb program
OP is trolling lmao. This dude
I think this scenario is unlikely to happen for the following reasons:
1) The kind of paper trail that we saw during SFFA vs. Harvard probably does not exist in a corporate a setting; That's not to say that there is no paper trail, but no one is spending the same amount of time that admissions people were over recorded mediums to deliberate over potential job candidates. The number of offline chats that happen make this extremely difficult.
2) Moot examples you provided below, frankly, especially if we really consider what OP said - diversity hiring programs (which tend to be soph and junior internships). I know over the past decade it's gotten increasingly difficult and competitive for candidates to get traction if they lack experience & relevant ECs, but a cursory look at 2024 finance listings show how much wiggle room is still actually afforded - where do listings explicitly state that a candidate has to be a worldbeater to get an interview or job? See the attached listing from JPM for an ER internship and square that with both candidate examples you provided. This isn't even one of the diversity programs listings, by the way. Sub 3.5 GPA? Minimum requirement is 3.2; No relevant ECs? Where did it explicitly state that relevant ECs were needed? And it's an even dumber point to bring up when we know that English/Religious studies majors/non-sequitur majors from Ivies have traditionally taken some of these spots. What relevant ECs did they have??
3) Should I even bother touching on the subject of interview practices and the emphasis that is placed on "fit" and the airport test in this job and how that is often used as a cudgel to ding candidates or as a basis to get their "guy/gal" in?
Good luck winning a suit on this kind of basis. There is more than enough opacity/subjectivity/protection/ in employment & hiring practices for employers to suddenly get scared based on an AA ban and any potential suits directed at hiring practices. Opponents of these programs will continue to cope and seethe if they think they will suddenly vanish. Only delusional morons actually think litigation will be some sort of panacea.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/30/business/economy/hiring-affirmative-…
Total troll post.
I am sure your "friend's" HR group would have formulated this opinion within hours of the ruling and that they would have carelessly disseminated it to someone in the industry.
whites & asians: god bless SCOTUS
diversity students: :'(((
This is such a troll post and people here are eating it up 😂
WSJ reporting corporate related AA lawsuits already coming thru…this is gonna change the game.
They can say it’s their mission etc. it was always about AA being an actual LAW. Now it’s not and it will shake things up considerably. It doesn’t mean it’s all gone but after some lawsuits etc it will be more subdued or they will totally Change the name of the program and run PR only campaigns.
poster Chuck-E-DickCheese will be here soon with another meltdown
Yeah good ol' Chuck is most likely Drumpfy or Ozymandia's alternate account. He's becoming a meme just like them, it's a joy to see
Hahahaha. Dude your copium level is so high , you’re literally believing a troll 😄😄😄😄
Yup no doubt. WSJ has an article below on this, there's a huge raft of cases now being prepared on corporate DEI initiatives. Hard enough to justify this program with the ruling but this is doubly compounded by the recession which makes it untenable to maintain low performing DEI people vs. the high performing Asian
https://www.wsj.com/articles/companiesexpectnew-challenges-todiversityp…
Being on the AM side, I can shed some more light on this. ESG was already taking a huge hit in the past 1-2yrs as Republicans and the middle fight back against wokeness. Even prior to this ruling we saw many companies say they will either not advertise targets explicitly or consider massively rolling them back altogether. This ruling plus to above poster's point on recession make such a position even harder to defend. We will see many, many lawsuits on this topic
To colleges, they will try to resist but when next year's class demographics become apparent it will be VERY clear who is complying and who isn't -- plenty of examples of where AA was banned over a decade ago into top public universities for certain states like CA where you can see there is and should be a significant shift towards Asians (marginally for whites)...the colleges where their stats magically don't dip much or at all will be crucified with lawsuits and you'll see way more depositions of admissions officers under oath asked about how they were pressured to let in diversity candidates (even though that is now illegal) and they will be forced into adopting the new standard. The terminal result 5yrs from now won't be completely meritocratic but far more so than it is today which is a HUGE win
Bear in mind lot of underperforming blacks who get in via AA won't even apply to top schools since they know about this ruling and know they can't cheat their way to the top. Paired with a smaller pipeline, college demographics becoming more reflective of merit, and corporations now scaling back on DEI it's a bright future for those with talent instead of the right skin color of the moment. God bless
I'm skeptical it'll work out this well. The decision says that you can still consider race if it affected a candidate's personal life. Most likely, schools like Harvard will add some sort of "Diversity Statement" section on their application where they invite discussion of how race, gender, etc. shaped your life. Wealthy and middle class blacks will spin up a sob story about discrimination and still get in that way. And I'm sure the most privileged black students will have college counselors that will advise them to do this.
I think it will get a little better but no doubt a lot of bs will go on.
Very glad to see this, make no mistake we'll see so many more articles in the news about this and so many more cases against companies that try to resist
I mean you do realize that the AA ruling by the Supreme Court is just for college admissions right?
I mean if you can’t figure out the basics, maybe that’s why you can’t break into a decent job? Lol
This dude is a total AA hire lol as has been explained a million times, the AA law is now null and void and the corporate lawsuits with the same issues are pouring in, there’s even a WSJ article about it that you keep ignoring
the ONLY reason corporations played along here was the LAW, that will now change as will how corporations play the AA game
Btw OP I think this thread has been shadow-banned, not seeing any notifications of new posts bringing it to the top of the JOB forum. I'd contact Patrick, the mods are getting heavy handed again
Oh no, there aren't any new posts notifications! The weak, power-hungry mods, at the behest of a shadowy woke cabal, have inexplicably shadow-banned this thread! The thread is literally categorized as "Trending" and has generally been right at the top if you sort by recently active or trending which probably means people don't want to engage with the nth tangentially related AA ban topic, traffic is low because holiday weekend or a variety of other reasons. How many tards are really on this website?
Lol Chuck-Dick-Cheese is so sad that he actually posted anonymously on the above (you can tell because his profile is also A2 in IB) because he was getting so much MS on his regular posts. What a clown
Steve and Henry trying to look good to Diddy at fundraisers
Lol seriously? Obviously you're expected to take advantage of an unfair advantage -- for you to not do so would be stupid. The point is to change the rules of the game to make it more meritocratic so that these kinds of outcomes don't happen. And now they will be massively limited
Fwiw, I'm in full support also of banning legacy and student athlete admissions. See below, turns out those are next. And that's only right IMO
https://www.wsj.com/articles/harvards-legacy-admissions-challenged-afte…
if only the intent of outcomes and legislation ever matched the actual result
Lol it's hilarious watching Chuck-Dick-Cheese try to cope so hard with the AA ruling and try to angrily post against everyone cheering this ruling. Can't wait as he loses his mind when corporate DEI lawsuits come pouring in as do challenges in all other areas like private high schools and the like
Lmao. “DEI LAWSUIT”
Lawsuit be like “Omg you didn’t hire me because I’m Asian. You hire a black female. I deserve this job more than they do”
Lmaoooooooo y’all brain dead I swear to God
Sounds good, hopefully this echoes across the corporate world.
Sad to see so many people hate on diversity. I get the merit argument, but don’t you think real diverse candidates that would never have the opportunities that you would deserve a chance? Sure there are people that are undeserving, but that is across races. There’s a reason why schools would be just filled with whites and asians if it weren’t for AA, and I can promise you it is not because diverse candidates lack brains. There are so many arguments for diversity, yet people here always overlook them because they are butthurt they didn’t get into the ivy they wanted to or they didn’t get that IB offer.
The most surprising development to me following the supreme court decision is that some collection of morons thinks they can legally challenge legacy & athlete admissions.
Not sure why some segment of this country struggles so hard to understand this stuff.
1. You’re not allowed to discriminate on race (and a few other things, gender etc) without a compelling interest.
2. You *are* allowed to discriminate in other areas, all you damn well please. If a university only wants tall people, they can explicitly do that.
In the history of frivolous lawsuits, this one will go down as historically frivolous. Some lawyer saw a marketing opportunity I guess. The schools should file a Rule 11 suit seeking damages for filing a case that has no merit.
Literally so many morons. It’s funny how some people are also just outing themselves as envious and borderline racists. Love me some salty losers who blame everyone else but themselves for their own failures.
Culpa perferendis laboriosam quasi ut est. Vitae qui id et temporibus quo facilis. Et pariatur itaque est asperiores est aut molestias blanditiis.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Molestiae autem id perferendis commodi. Placeat assumenda quod hic dignissimos voluptas. Commodi deserunt possimus autem eos iusto ut adipisci. Et animi in inventore vitae neque porro est.
Quam facilis id officia laboriosam placeat omnis doloribus. Quis laborum et est voluptas odio vel. Id nisi nulla ut voluptas necessitatibus vero. Et doloremque excepturi dicta cumque quae. Consequatur tempore voluptatum repellat.
Non voluptatibus sit nobis animi et omnis earum eos. Labore voluptate totam sequi et excepturi est. Nihil et ad et cumque voluptatum doloremque. Et nam nihil voluptatibus facere ullam qui itaque. Illo dolores velit ut commodi aut quidem incidunt.
Distinctio temporibus placeat alias nemo iste omnis amet eum. Voluptatum corporis maiores sed est. Odit suscipit delectus architecto quo. Provident dolor dolores est reprehenderit est et. Voluptatem similique et et nobis id sit fugit tempora. Sunt quae et sunt temporibus earum tempora.
Earum nesciunt distinctio omnis vero. Placeat ut doloremque nihil sed aliquam sed. Quia qui qui sapiente aut enim fugit. Qui omnis sit enim consequatur.