ADVERTISEMENT

Coalition of CEO’s to hire 100,000 white people!

Roy L Fuchs

Roy L Fuchs

HR MVP
Nov 23, 2012
1,417
2,424
113
Actually, no. That would be racist. But stating they are not hiring whites and hiring 100,000 Asians, blacks and Latinos is fine. For some reason equal opportunity employment laws are thrown out the window for the social justice warriors. Of course, for the Dems this doesn’t matter. Their only two qualifications for VP were: 1) Black 2) Vagina https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Business...2302969&id=72302969&__twitter_impression=true

All others need not apply.

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Business...2302969&id=72302969&__twitter_impression=true
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phenomenally Frantastic, anon_89hvcc2uyzmki, chodehawk and 2 others
"some of New York City's largest employers together are pledging to hire 100,000 Black, Latino, Asian and low-income workers over the next 10"

I assume they put "and" in the wrong place ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ping72 and hawksurprize
Also, I missed in the statement where they said they aren't hiring whites. Do you really think Amazon is not going to hire a white person in the next 10 years?
 
Roy L Fuchs said:
Actually, no. That would be racist. But stating they are not hiring whites and hiring 100,000 Asians, blacks and Latinos is fine. For some reason equal opportunity employment laws are thrown out the window for the social justice warriors. Of course, for the Dems this doesn’t matter. Their only two qualifications for VP were: 1) Black 2) Vagina

All others need not apply.

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Business...2302969&id=72302969&__twitter_impression=true
Click to expand...
You are dumb, like MAGA dumb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Capernum, BioHawk, ping72 and 7 others
Roy L Fuchs said:
Actually, no. That would be racist. But stating they are not hiring whites and hiring 100,000 Asians, blacks and Latinos is fine. For some reason equal opportunity employment laws are thrown out the window for the social justice warriors. Of course, for the Dems this doesn’t matter. Their only two qualifications for VP were: 1) Black 2) Vagina

All others need not apply.

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Business...2302969&id=72302969&__twitter_impression=true
Click to expand...

You know, Fuchs, I actually agree with you on this. Liberal identity politics have gotten out of hand and have become next-level ridiculous.

I'm glad to see you believe white guys shouldn't be discriminated against. Unless, of course, you're trying to build a college basketball team, amirite? :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: hexumhawk, Bloody Run Hawk and Roy L Fuchs
markfromj said:
Yup. Once again, we are replacing alleged discrimination with real discrimination.

Appalling.
Click to expand...

What is the specific real discrimation detailed in the article? Can you for once in your life actually support a statement you make?
 
  • Like
Reactions: seam
BABiscuit said:
What is the specific real discrimation detailed in the article? Can you for once in your life actually support a statement you make?
Click to expand...

Yes. The pledge itself confirms discrimination. They have a certain number of positions they need to fill, and, of that number, they are setting a quota that must be filled by a specific race. As such, members of other races cannot get those jobs. Textbook discrimination.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phenomenally Frantastic
markfromj said:
Yes. The pledge itself confirms discrimination. They have a certain number of positions they need to fill, and, of that number, they are setting a quota that must be filled by a specific race. As such, members of other races cannot get those jobs. Textbook discrimination.
Click to expand...

What if they were just setting up programs that they believed would help under-represented groups compete for jobs that are being filled by the normal hiring process? Where in the article did you see where there was any company using a quota system?
 
blhawk said:
Yeah, women make up 54 pct of the electorate....screw them
Click to expand...

And none have ever served as President or VP. Unwise to think that there have never been more qualified women than men who've held those positions. Unwise to say that there aren't women who can do the job as well as if not better than men in 2020. There isn't one man who will be a better VP than every woman in America. There's no reason to be upset with Biden's decision to bust the gender barrier that's existed in the Executive Branch. We're many decades past due.
 
  • Like
Reactions: globalhawk, Capernum, billanole and 1 other person
markfromj said:
In the headline (100k).
Click to expand...

Okay, again, is a pledge to hire the same as a quota if they plan on following their normal hiring process, but anticipate outreach programs they participate will result in under-represented groups filling a greater portion of their workforce?
 
blhawk said:
Yeah, women make up 54 pct of the electorate....screw them
Click to expand...

Easy there buddy. I didnt say it was unwise to select a women. I said it was unwise to announce he was only considering a woman. IMO, it would have been politically better to select a woman, but not announce that he was only considering woman. That way others can't try to make the agenda that your selection wasn't the best qualified and only got the job because she met the gender requirement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FormerlyCyberCy and timinatoria
BlackNGoldBleeder said:
I'm not clicking on the article, but cons are correct on the issue of identity politics. Libs have gone full potatoes on this.
Click to expand...
You believe this because cons have been screaming it so long that you have been worn down.

Sure some of that happens. But it really isn't that prevalent. And it's usually motivated by prior injustices that should be corrected.

Don't be so quick to side with the wrong folks,
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlickShagwell
BABiscuit said:
Okay, again, is a pledge to hire the same as a quota if they plan on following their normal hiring process, but anticipate outreach programs they participate will result in under-represented groups filling a greater portion of their workforce?
Click to expand...
why would you even assign a number? I'd also like to know how they come up with the number.
 
What Would Jesus Do? said:
You believe this because cons have been screaming it so long that you have been worn down.

Sure some of that happens. But it really isn't that prevalent. And it's usually motivated by prior injustices that should be corrected.

Don't be so quick to side with the wrong folks,
Click to expand...

I've had liberals screaming it down my throat a lot longer. It most certainly is prevalent.

I'm not quick to side with "the wrong folks." Identity politics have gotten out of hand, and that is a left issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UKGrad93
blhawk said:
Yeah, women make up 54 pct of the electorate....screw them
Click to expand...
BABiscuit said:
Okay, again, is a pledge to hire the same as a quota if they plan on following their normal hiring process, but anticipate outreach programs they participate will result in under-represented groups filling a greater portion of their workforce?
Click to expand...

"Anticipate", fine. But they are committing to hire 100k minority people.

This is different than "anticipating". They are going to make sure they hire 100 k minorities, regardless of skill level versus others.

Pure racial discrimination.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roy L Fuchs
markfromj said:
"Anticipate", fine. But they are committing to hire 100k minority people.

This is different than "anticipating". They are going to make sure they hire 100 k minorities, regardless of skill level versus others.

Pure racial discrimination.
Click to expand...

You think they are going to jail in 10 years if they dont meet the goal. I dont think saying commit instead of anticipate is the difference between an acceptable initiative and pure racial discrimination.
 
BABiscuit said:
You think they are going to jail in 10 years if they dont meet the goal. I dont think saying commit instead of anticipate is the difference between an acceptable initiative and pure racial discrimination.
Click to expand...

Well, if they do what they say they are going to do, it is clearly illegal. But no, they won't be jailed. In fact, they will be praised for this discrimination.

C'mon...don't let you proper desire for improved standing for minorities cloud your judgement of right and wrong. Of course minorities have been historically discriminated against. But let's just end discrimination. One thing we all can do: Refuse to specify race on applications etc.
 
markfromj said:
Well, if they do what they say they are going to do, it is clearly illegal. But no, they won't be jailed. In fact, they will be praised for this discrimination.

C'mon...don't let you proper desire for improved standing for minorities cloud your judgement of right and wrong. Of course minorities have been historically discriminated against. But let's just end discrimination. One thing we all can do: Refuse to specify race on applications etc.
Click to expand...

I was wrong thinking you should try to argue your positions. You suck at this and should go back to one liners that we can all ignore. No where did any of the companies say they were giving preferential hiring status to minorities. You are reading what you want and filling in the gaps with assumptions to fit your argument.
 
BlackNGoldBleeder said:
I've had liberals screaming it down my throat a lot longer. It most certainly is prevalent.

I'm not quick to side with "the wrong folks." Identity politics have gotten out of hand, and that is a left issue.
Click to expand...

Remind me again, "Who is Trump's base?"
 
@Roy L Fuchs is quick to call cities where black people live “shitholes,” (and thinks he has all the answers that have evaded the black community for generations, which is pretty f*cking racist, but whatever) but bawls his eyes out when CEO’s make a commitment to change the economic circumstances and improve the lives of the people he spends quite a bit of time thinking about and looking down upon. From last year:


Roy L Fuchs said:
Of course, any criticism of a black person automatically means you’re racist. Baltimore is a crime filled, gang filled, poverty stricken democrat run shithole just like all the other large Democrat run cities. Liberal policies don’t work. They actually stifle opportunity. Teach blacks to focus on the family, reduce the fact that 80% of black kids live in a single parent home. The best way to create family wealth is a two parent family. The best way to keep black kids out of prison is having a two parent household with a positive male role model. The useless NAACP doesn’t teach any of that. They just keep blaming Republicans for the continued crime and poverty in shithole Democrat cities like Baltimore, New York, Atlanta, Chicago, etc.
https://www.investors.com/politics/...cratic-rule-ruined-some-of-our-finest-cities/
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Roy L Fuchs said:
Actually, no. That would be racist. But stating they are not hiring whites and hiring 100,000 Asians, blacks and Latinos is fine. For some reason equal opportunity employment laws are thrown out the window for the social justice warriors. Of course, for the Dems this doesn’t matter. Their only two qualifications for VP were: 1) Black 2) Vagina

All others need not apply.

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Business...2302969&id=72302969&__twitter_impression=true
Click to expand...

After centuries of white American males being the first in line for every position of power, white males are now incredulous that they weren't even considered for the VP position! The injustice of it all! Can the FBI (led by Barr so it's fair) investigate this travesty?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Capernum and FlickShagwell
BABiscuit said:
No where did any of the companies say they were giving preferential hiring status to minorities.
Click to expand...

Yes they did.

And even worse, they are doing so without concern for whether the “black” or “Latino” is economically disadvantaged (hiring black, Latino, AND low-income). So, a black living on the upper East side still counts.

Just tokenism at its finest.
 
markfromj said:
Yes they did.

And even worse, they are doing so without concern for whether the “black” or “Latino” is economically disadvantaged (hiring black, Latino, AND low-income). So, a black living on the upper East side still counts.

Just tokenism at its finest.
Click to expand...

Where did the article say they give preferential treatment? Can you quote the text because I am missing it.
 
BABiscuit said:
Where did the article say they give preferential treatment? Can you quote the text because I am missing it.
Click to expand...

“...pledging to hire 100,000 Black, Latino, Asian and low-income workers over the next 10 years.“
 
markfromj said:
Yes they did.

And even worse, they are doing so without concern for whether the “black” or “Latino” is economically disadvantaged (hiring black, Latino, AND low-income). So, a black living on the upper East side still counts.

Just tokenism at its finest.
Click to expand...

Yeah, white males have had no distinct advantage for the past, oh, 300-400 years in America! #METOO is really screwing men over too. Just ask Donnie Jr.!
How in the hell are white men going to succeed without their normal level of entitlement? Oh wait. They're going to have to work as hard as everyone else and prove their competence? Snap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Capernum and FlickShagwell
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NoleATL

QAnon Ginni Gave Trump Lists Of People To Hire/Fire

Replies
13
Views
410
Off Topic
GES4
GES4
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back