I think they rationalize that diversity programs are fair because they directly benefit from them. They are diversity candidates and are happy to receive hand-outs so will do mental gymnastics to justify their validity and virtue. I think people that claim oppression and victimization generally do so because they want compensation and unfair advantages. It's the modus operandi of the modern age. Claim as much victimization as possible in order to receive as many privileges and hand-outs as you can.
I recognize this is not always true. There are cases in which there is actual oppression but many of the groups that benefit from DEI are no longer oppressed like they used to be.
At the end of the day getting easier or exclusive opportunities because of your race, gender, or sexuality is totally discriminatory and unfair.
Asian and Indian immigrants were able to do well without them despite facing discrimination too. Instead of making excuses and asking for handicaps they've established themselves through discipline and persistence.
People should be hired based on merit. What they can actually bring to the table, the skills and knowledge they possess, how much they can contribute, and hiring must factor in other characteristics based on more tangible ability.
Treating people differently based on the way they look however, is an absolute disservice to the people of our country!
x
No shit dude.
But why does no one here complain when white guy Chad asks his dad to give him intros to every MD on the street. The complaining isn’t proportional at all
I'll give you that. Legacy admissions and nepotism are cancers in this country too.
What exactly is the invisible hand that keeps our world spinning again?
The irony of this is stunning. Are the rest of us here for charity? I aint. I'm tryina get PAID big man.
Yes Yes I see what you mean but I think sometimes self interest needs to be reigned in or regulated. That's why we have laws around fraud and theft and etc.
This isn't a thread about the merits of libertarianism.
.
While im not a diversity candidate, it would be unfair to dismiss these programs as ineffective or lacking value. Given the pivotal role banks play in society and their interaction with a diverse clientele, it's imperative to have a workforce that mirrors this diversity proportionately.
Also you can be a transgender black lesbian. If you don’t meet the requirements of the job, and you didn’t go to the right school, you’re not getting in, just to counter the “meritocracy” argument ppl like to throw out every time this topic comes up.
No I don't think diversity should be the number 1 concern of any organization. It's much more important to pick highly qualified candidates than to make sure your headcounts statistics line up 1:1 with society's mix....
It's fairer that way and leads to much better outcomes for all organizations, no matter what the mix is. Are we going to start enforcing DEI in the NBA and replace current athletes with sub-par white guys because there aren't enough of them? Would ruin the sport and be anti-meritocratic...
And also no, I've seen under-qualified candidates get picked because we needed more "XYZ" and trust me in those situations the entire group hates working with these individuals.
It’s funny when the likes of you compare IB to the NBA, one of the only organizations that is majority Black employees (out of like 200 total), in discussions about diversity programs and affirmative action as if (white) women (the largest beneficiaries by a mile), gay people, vets etc aren’t also significant beneficiaries. The NBA is a long shot for anyone and IB is much much more attainable for the common undergrad. It’s not even a remotely similar situation and your disdain specifically for black people is evident.
How many times are you people going to rehash the same conversation with the same talking points. The floor is still majority white and male. The promotions are still going to majority white and male. The people
put in front of clients are still majority white and male. No one on here dares call out nepotism hires though, which is much more prevalent, hidden and undeserving. It’s very ironic you talk about false victimization and oppression, yet here you are victimizing yourself because you couldn’t break through.
You could say what you want about diversity programs, but many of the diversity program hires are still qualified applicants who went to top schools and know something. Those who aren’t are pretty easily exposed and managed out. “Regular” process folks who suck also get hired and eventually fired as well.
I don't see that. I've honestly seen the most competent people rise through the ranks regardless of race and gender. So many of my VPs and up were women, non-white, etc. People who do a good job get rewarded from what I've seen. But at this point your argument vs mine is a game of he said, she said anecdotes. I think any boss with some sense would pick the higher performer / deal-closer regardless of race etc.
I am ready to call out nepo hires and legacy admissions into schools. Those mechanisms to get into universities and to get jobs shouldn't exist and should be erased along with DEI.
I got into the industry in a BB. Please stop assuming anyone who holds this stance is resentful and jealous. That's a cheap tactic to undermine your opposition's concerns and opinions.
On your last point, I agree many of the women, "POCs" (if you want to call them that) etc I've worked with were competent. I don't believe they even needed DEI to break into the industry. They did well in interviews and do well at their jobs. I think DEI harms them because there's an inherent suspicion against these people that they got in because of their identity when they did not. Also, there have been instances during recruiting where we skipped higher ranked candidates (per interview performance) to hit quotas. Those people have often turned out to be head-aches. So it does hurt the group and is anti-meritocratic.
Floor still majority white male? Not sure what bank you work at but it clearly isn't a big one. White males are 30% in every intern/analyst class I've seen or been in.
Promotions majority white male? Again another false claim. All you need to do is take a look at banks literally saying they push promotions for diverse people and have diverse senior targets etc.
Clients majority white male? Perhaps, but given the average age of bank clients, they come from a generation which was >80%+ white so somewhat expected.
No one one WSO complains about nepotism hires? Can you not read? People complain about that all the time. Why is it that pro diversity arguments always use whataboutism even when it just isn't true because they have no actual argument to defend their programs.
Handouts for me, not for thee
Rerum dolorem dolor natus quia asperiores. Molestiae totam omnis enim voluptas unde sed voluptas incidunt. Quis eum molestiae sed quidem magni maiores corporis. Ea totam odit quis qui eos. Voluptas aut et ratione repellat autem illum.
Commodi eligendi omnis rerum ut recusandae et. Et officiis architecto aut ab sint. In dicta dolor enim aliquam amet nam minima dolorem.
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...