DEIA

[JHC]

Couple of thoughts. The moment you start considering DIE criteria in the hiring / promotion process, you are, by definition, no longer making these decisions based on competency alone. That doesn't seem like the smartest path. You want your airline pilot or heart surgeon to have been put there based on something other than qualifications? Also, the people pushing this DIE stuff again, by definition, assume that certain groups of people are unqualified to obtain positions based on competency and must be boosted by DIE criteria. I think I would be insulted were I in one of those groups. Let me sink or swim based on merit. To that point, one of the brightest, most promising hires we had at the place I recently retired from is in a group that benefits from this DIE business. He doesn't need that kind of "help". He showed up ready to work and is going to do just fine without DIE.

As an aside, Jocko just did a podcast on the life of Booker T. Washington. Holy hell, what a freakin' gangster!! He (Booker T., not Jocko) must be rolling in his grave over this nonsense.

Maybe. But there's a lot of evidence going back decades that a whole lot of hiring is done as a defacto search for mirror images of either what the hiring decision person is himself or what is considered an archetype of for the position. And it may be with the best of intentions, as they think they have a lock on what competency is, looks like, sounds like.

That may be more prevalent in the private sector. I don't know what the process is in the case of the OP.

[JCN]

Couple of thoughts. The moment you start considering DIE criteria in the hiring / promotion process, you are, by definition, no longer making these decisions based on competency alone. That doesn't seem like the smartest path. You want your airline pilot or heart surgeon to have been put there based on something other than qualifications?

I can speak to that. "Competency" is not purely objective. There is a strong subjective and bias component.

In addition, to perform at peak potential requires support from a TEAM that believes in them.

This is part of the bias in training and a main part of DEI in support rather than just purely a hiring quota.

Maybe. But there's a lot of evidence going back decades that a whole lot of hiring is done as a defacto search for mirror images of either what the hiring decision person is himself or what is considered an archetype of for the position. And it may be with the best of intentions, as they think they have a lock on what competency is, looks like, sounds like.

That may be more prevalent in the private sector. I don't know what the process is in the case of the OP.

Well stated and spot on.

The equality in the DEI isn't about just purely having bodies in position that look different. It's about having more of an open mind of where your personal biases, ageism, sexism, cultural intolerance hurts people's performance and ability to do their best.

Coming from an immigrant family, my father always used to say that he had to work twice as hard to prove his competency. It's hard to change people's minds when they have a preconceived notion of competency versus incompetency and when it's based off their bias whether implicit or explicit.

Judgment of competency has a large subjective component and lack of support hurts the ability to perform as well.

[rob_s]

Couple of thoughts. The moment you start considering DIE criteria in the hiring / promotion process, you are, by definition, no longer making these decisions based on competency alone. That doesn't seem like the smartest path. You want your airline pilot or heart surgeon to have been put there based on something other than qualifications? Also, the people pushing this DIE stuff again, by definition, assume that certain groups of people are unqualified to obtain positions based on competency and must be boosted by DIE criteria. I think I would be insulted were I in one of those groups. Let me sink or swim based on merit. To that point, one of the brightest, most promising hires we had at the place I recently retired from is in a group that benefits from this DIE business. He doesn't need that kind of "help". He showed up ready to work and is going to do just fine without DIE.

As an aside, Jocko just did a podcast on the life of Booker T. Washington. Holy hell, what a freakin' gangster!! He (Booker T., not Jocko) must be rolling in his grave over this nonsense.

I agree with most of that.

However...

As I posted up-thread, my industry has been, and continues to be, a victim of people just cloning themselves.

When I think of positive DE&I efforts I think of things like altering our recruiting process to include HBCU, recruiting from tangential industries, combating incidents of racism or other discrimination in the workplace (construction is still really bad for this, and also has a really bad rep) so as to not scare off new hires and prospects, etc.

I want to increase the size of the POOL I'm drawing from. Once in the pool, I only want the floaters, or better yet strong swimmers, but for the past several years my pool has been empty as fuck, and the people in it are a bunch of fat, lazy, entitled, white guys.

[4RNR]

I can speak to that. "Competency" is not purely objective. There is a strong subjective and bias component.

In addition, to perform at peak potential requires support from a TEAM that believes in them.

This is part of the bias in training and a main part of DEI in support rather than just purely a hiring quota.





Well stated and spot on.

The equality in the DEI isn't about just purely having bodies in position that look different. It's about having more of an open mind of where your personal biases, ageism, sexism, cultural intolerance hurts people's performance and ability to do their best.

Coming from an immigrant family, my father always used to say that he had to work twice as hard to prove his competency. It's hard to change people's minds when they have a preconceived notion of competency versus incompetency and when it's based off their bias whether implicit or explicit.

Judgment of competency has a large subjective component and lack of support hurts the ability to perform as well.

But is that how it actually works?

It may if the job is nothing more than a body that fills a position. Cashier, burger flipper, ...etc.... Not trying to put down those people but it's a job that anyone can do.

Now you look at how high schools are purposely either throttling down better students or colleges flat out refusing them do you think you're going to actually get the best person for the job?

Fat lazy white guys is also not good but this will essentially turn into quotas the higher up in salary you go.

The way it's being done now, in 10 years you'll have a lot of mediocrity because you'll be hiring the best mediocre employee.

[blues]

All I know is that I've partnered and worked with some great Black agents and some crap ones.
Some great Latin / Hispanic agents, and some crap ones.
Some great White agents, and some crap ones.
Other groups are not represented with as large a population to generalize with from my particular experience.
All categories contain men and women.

What would I be looking for in an agent?

Honesty
Integrity
Competence
Experience
Willingness to go the extra mile
Physical preparedness
Mental and emotional preparedness
etc.

I have known agents who have lied on the stand, (and whom I would never willingly work with in the aftermath), agents who cut corners, who took the easy way around something or played fast and loose with the facts.

I have seen people fuck up and move up, and people get promoted to positions at the local and HQ level when their knowledge and ability was something that should have been called into question. But guess what...they got the job anyway.


Now, one can argue that the same standards can be upheld with DEIA or any other program designed with "good intentions". But in my, (admittedly not very recent) experience, too many of the boxes that actually should be checked are left unchecked...in favor of ones that "look good" for management's compliance with written or verbal mandates to push certain candidates, even to the detriment of the culture, mission and capability of the organization.

I don't think any of my former partners and friends who were "minorities" would take issue with me on the substance of what I am trying to say. I've heard them say the same themselves. And I'd have willingly put my life on the line for any of them, and have.

If we're going to go to such extremes, then you may as well limit the number of agents of any particular demographic to the percentage of the general population their group represents. Is that fair? Some might say it is.

I want the best candidates for the job...I don't give a crap about their race, religion, color, or ethnicity. I would draw the line at their identifying as anything other than a competent and honest LEO committed to defending, honoring and protecting the Constitution of the United States.


Any program is only as good as the people conducting it, and their willingness to do so honorably. So far, what I've seen for the most part, is lacking. I'd prefer to be wrong.



ETA: For the record, in my old agency I was generally sought out by most of the young minority agents as a mentor...not only for guidance on how to run investigations or answer questions about the law...but also to help with their decision making in the realm of personal finance and life choices. I offer this only to provide a counter to any of the "angry old white man" illusions anyone might be harboring.

[vcdgrips]

My own opinions and ramble follows:

I find it moderately ironic that there is this recurring sense of indignation when DEI comes into play in the hiring process built nobody says a thing about:

Legacy and hook up hires (i.e Fire/Police departments being made up by 2nd/3rd gen folks, mostly white, mostly male, law firms hiring the sons and daughters of partners at “peer” firms at their own etc.)

I have worked with far too many legacy white officers who will candidly state that they got hired because of whose son/daughter they were, not on the basis of the highest test score. I just had lunch with a law classmate who hired the son of an another classmate/friend/neighbor since law school. NEVER would have got the job but for the connection.

I fully acknowledge that other identifiable cohorts i.e. the Irish/Italians/Jews were not the beneficiaries of Govt sanctioned DEI. But were they not of their own when they made headway in certain industries/professions?


I fully acknowledged that the Irish were indentured, functionally enslaved and systematically put upon through reconstruction-and a bit beyond. In Ireland, Britain and in the US, particularly so if they were Roman Catholic.

Having said that by the end of the Civil War, WASPs were just getting started with black folks i.e. Post Reconstruction Jim Crow etc

Post WWI -when Irish and black vets returned stateside, did the expanding civil service, railroad and union jobs welcome blacks with the same level of hospitality?Not remotely so.

Those jobs built solidly working class families, home ownership and the beginnings of generational wealth and stability.

Could the few black owned farmers get loans and crop insurance from the feds like their white counterparts? Even when black folks tried to buy the land they worked for market value, who was to say if the recorder of deeds in po dunk Alabama would even record the sale and what court would force them to do so?

Post WWII, when black vets returned home, same issues re civil service, union jobs and GI Bill benefits that the vast majority of state schools simply refused to accept because they accepted no black undergrads or grad students. Tough to pull yourself up by your bootstraps when the boots you are given have none.

The playing field for the Irish and Jews for that matter may have started as tilted as that for Blacks in the US, but by the end of WW II it was far more level if you were perceived as white, even if not WASP.

White “supremacy” was so ingrained as a means of control in the South and elsewhere that even German POWs had more freedom of movement in the during WWII than black males of the same age.

https://time.com/5872361/wwii-german-pows-civil-rights/


One generation later—-we all have equal opportunity, not result- opportunity?

The House my dad bought for 29K in 1961 (WWII/Korea Vet) in the neighborhood he wanted is worth 429k today. The house his black counterpart could buy ( in a redlined neighborhood) for the same 29k is worth less than half of the 429K. That difference in equity is the difference in financing how many post high school educational experiences in that family?

Urban v Suburban v Rural Public Schools., Public V Private Schools- equal opportunity there?

As a father, person and atty, I am often better at defining problems than solutions. Having said that, our country is like an old house, we may not have had anything to do with all of the neglect and problems, but now that we own the house, we have the responsibility to take a hard look inside and repair and maintain it. That starts with looking at it inside and out, defining and working the problems.

I fully acknowledge all of this is a pendulum that first went too far one way, was held there, and now is swinging rapidly the other way in response.

Rant over. Blessings to us all, in these times and places.

[Joe S]

My own opinions and ramble follows:

I find it moderately ironic that there is this recurring sense of indignation when DEI comes into play in the hiring process built nobody says a thing about:

Legacy and hook up hires (i.e Fire/Police departments being made up by 2nd/3rd gen folks, mostly white, mostly male, law firms hiring the sons and daughters of partners at “peer” firms at their own etc.)

I have worked with far too many legacy white officers who will candidly state that they got hired because of whose son/daughter they were, not on the basis of the highest test score. I just had lunch with a law classmate who hired the son of an another classmate/friend/neighbor since law school. NEVER would have got the job but for the connection.

I fully acknowledge that other identifiable cohorts i.e. the Irish/Italians/Jews were not the beneficiaries of Govt sanctioned DEI. But were they not of their own when they made headway in certain industries/professions?


I fully acknowledged that the Irish were indentured, functionally enslaved and systematically put upon through reconstruction-and a bit beyond. In Ireland, Britain and in the US, particularly so if they were Roman Catholic.

Having said that by the end of the Civil War, WASPs were just getting started with black folks i.e. Post Reconstruction Jim Crow etc

Post WWI -when Irish and black vets returned stateside, did the expanding civil service, railroad and union jobs welcome blacks with the same level of hospitality?Not remotely so.

Those jobs built solidly working class families, home ownership and the beginnings of generational wealth and stability.

Could the few black owned farmers get loans and crop insurance from the feds like their white counterparts? Even when black folks tried to buy the land they worked for market value, who was to say if the recorder of deeds in po dunk Alabama would even record the sale and what court would force them to do so?

Post WWII, when black vets returned home, same issues re civil service, union jobs and GI Bill benefits that the vast majority of state schools simply refused to accept because they accepted no black undergrads or grad students. Tough to pull yourself up by your bootstraps when the boots you are given have none.

The playing field for the Irish and Jews for that matter may have started as tilted as that for Blacks in the US, but by the end of WW II it was far more level if you were perceived as white, even if not WASP.

White “supremacy” was so ingrained as a means of control in the South and elsewhere that even German POWs had more freedom of movement in the during WWII than black males of the same age.

https://time.com/5872361/wwii-german-pows-civil-rights/


One generation later—-we all have equal opportunity, not result- opportunity?

The House my dad bought for 29K in 1961 (WWII/Korea Vet) in the neighborhood he wanted is worth 429k today. The house his black counterpart could buy ( in a redlined neighborhood) for the same 29k is worth less than half of the 429K. That difference in equity is the difference in financing how many post high school educational experiences in that family?

Urban v Suburban v Rural Public Schools., Public V Private Schools- equal opportunity there?

As a father, person and atty, I am often better at defining problems than solutions. Having said that, our country is like an old house, we may not have had anything to do with all of the neglect and problems, but now that we own the house, we have the responsibility to take a hard look inside and repair and maintain it. That starts with looking at it inside and out, defining and working the problems.

I fully acknowledge all of this is a pendulum that first went too far one way, was held there, and now is swinging rapidly the other way in response.

Rant over. Blessings to us all, in these times and places.

I typed and deleted several things that I realized weren't adding anything of substance, but just want to say you illustrated well an example of the complexity of these issues, and why it's not a binary thing.

[blues]

When I decided to post this thread I hesitated because I knew that it was a "hot button" topic...but I think it's a conversation worth having regardless of where one stands in the continuum between divergent poles.

I'll leave this conversation with this short clip...

[Tensaw]

I agree with most of that.

However...

As I posted up-thread, my industry has been, and continues to be, a victim of people just cloning themselves.

When I think of positive DE&I efforts I think of things like altering our recruiting process to include HBCU, recruiting from tangential industries, combating incidents of racism or other discrimination in the workplace (construction is still really bad for this, and also has a really bad rep) so as to not scare off new hires and prospects, etc.

I want to increase the size of the POOL I'm drawing from. Once in the pool, I only want the floaters, or better yet strong swimmers, but for the past several years my pool has been empty as fuck, and the people in it are a bunch of fat, lazy, entitled, white guys.

Not to put words in your mouth, but what you seem to be saying here is that your pool lacks merit, so you are looking elsewhere for talent; not that you would pursue employment of non-white guys solely for the sake of the DIE. Again, merit / ability is the key here, not belonging to some favored group. This squares with the quote from Mr. Booker T. Washington below - he makes my point better than I can.

I guess my concern with the DIE movement comes largely from the fact that the gov is promoting it. ("I'm from the government and I'm here to help...") That forms the basis for my mistrust of all this. If a private employer wants to cast a wider net looking for good help, I say Rock on!

I also get that this can be a nuanced issue. Again, I'm unconvinced that the gov does nuance very well. With that said, allow me to throw a quote from Mr. Booker T. Washington and then I too will be exiting this discussion.

“From any point of view, I had rather be what I am, a member of the Negro race, than be able to claim membership with the most favoured of any other race. I have always been made sad when I have heard members of any race claiming rights and privileges, or certain badges of distinction, on the ground simply that they were members of this or that race, regardless of their own individual worth or attainments. I have been made to feel sad for such persons because I am conscious of the fact that mere connection with what is known as a superior race will not permanently carry an individual forward unless he has individual worth, and mere connection with what is regarded as an inferior race will not finally hold an individual back if he possesses intrinsic, individual merit. Every persecuted individual and race should get much consolation out of the great human law, which is universal and eternal, that merit, no matter under what skin found, is, in the long run, recognized and rewarded. This I have said here, not to call attention to myself as an individual, but to the race to which I am proud to belong.”
― Booker T. Washington, Up from Slavery

Mr. Washington was clearly an exceptional human being, and again, a friggin' gangster in terms of how he approached life. It doesn't sound like he ever made any excuses for himself even though his life history was rife with opportunities to do just that. He accomplished much during his life. I am resolved to read his book, Up From Slavery, and through that, become better.

[Clusterfrack]

I can speak to that. "Competency" is not purely objective. There is a strong subjective and bias component.

In addition, to perform at peak potential requires support from a TEAM that believes in them.

This is part of the bias in training and a main part of DEI in support rather than just purely a hiring quota.
...
The equality in the DEI isn't about just purely having bodies in position that look different. It's about having more of an open mind of where your personal biases, ageism, sexism, cultural intolerance hurts people's performance and ability to do their best.

Coming from an immigrant family, my father always used to say that he had to work twice as hard to prove his competency. It's hard to change people's minds when they have a preconceived notion of competency versus incompetency and when it's based off their bias whether implicit or explicit.

Judgment of competency has a large subjective component and lack of support hurts the ability to perform as well.

I agree. However...

Here's a quote:
“Success and impact metrics in science are based on a system that perpetuates sexist and racist “rewards” by prioritizing citations and impact factors. These metrics are flawed and biased against already marginalized groups and fail to accurately capture the breadth of individuals’ meaningful scientific impacts. We advocate shifting this outdated value system to advance science through principles of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion”
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiolog...l.pbio.3001282

This is a power grab by EDI groups. The strategy is to devalue the well-established measures of success by researchers and scholars--publications, citations, h-Index, journal impact factors, and funding. Then, replace those metrics with arbitrary (and easy to abuse) factors like skin color, gender identity, and most importantly commitment to EDI.

However, until funding agencies award grants and contracts based on Wokeness instead of actual productivity, this is a doomed approach for any university serious about research.