Racism

[Vive_La_Villa]

5 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

In the States, Wells Fargo in particular has a long and well-documented history of discrimination. 

Here's an excerpt from a very interesting and detailed article unpacking it

I know that in the UK the banks are known to discriminate against black businesses in particular. Not to mention they are twice as likely to deny refunds to black victims of fraud.

From the Times

Nick Clegg's take on the matter

The last one is very interesting. I still don't get why Indians don't seem to have the same issues as Black, Bangladeshi and Pakistani people in the uk. 

Strange.  That sauce must be doing wonders for us. 

[Keyblade]

13 minutes ago, AvfcRigo82 said:

Are you absolutely sure about this?

Yes. 

Universities:

Quote

The overhaul of admissions, in which applicants would be identified by a number rather than their name, would reduce “unconscious bias” against students from ethnic minorities by university admissions staff, according to a study by the race equality thinktank the Runnymede Trust, which was published on 3 February.

The recommendation is based on evidence that black and ethnic minority students are less likely to win a place at a top universities even when they have the same grades.

Once A-level grades are taken into account, 52 per cent of applications by white British students to Russell Group universities resulted in offers compared with only 44.7 per cent for black Caribbean students, 42.6 per cent for Bangladeshi students and 39.6 per cent for Pakistani students. For those from black African backgrounds, the offer rate was 39.6 per cent.

Jobs:

Quote

Researchers sent nearly 3,000 job applications under false identities in an attempt to discover if employers were discriminating against jobseekers with foreign names. Using names recognisably from three different communities – Nazia Mahmood, Mariam Namagembe and Alison Taylor – false identities were created with similar experience and qualifications. Every false applicant had British education and work histories.

They found that an applicant who appeared to be white would send nine applications before receiving a positive response of either an invitation to an interview or an encouraging telephone call. Minority candidates with the same qualifications and experience had to send 16 applications before receiving a similar response.

The alarming results have prompted Jim Knight, the employment minister, to consider barring companies that have been found to have discriminated against employees from applying for government contracts.

Housing: (from the government's racial disparity audit)

Quote

BAME [Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic] households were also more likely to wait longer for a housing offer, to be offered poorer quality homes, and flats rather than houses. Some housing officers were seen to be steering BAME applicants away from white neighbourhoods, based on judgments about social class as well as racial grounds.

Institutional racism has equally played a continuing role in perpetuating racial disparities in housing. Despite this, concerns about the housing circumstances of BAME people have receded in housing debates, abetted by a rapidly commercialising social housing sector and a consumerist approach to regulation since 2010.

Previously, social landlords (local councils and housing associations) were at the forefront of scrutinising their performance in providing housing opportunities to BAME applicants – through fair housing policies, ethnic monitoring, localised needs assessments, delivery of more culturally sensitive housing and services, racism awareness training for staff, and positive action to promote BAME staff to management positions. And yet, much of this is now history: residential qualifications have returned to the social housing system through the Localism Act 2011, and together with choice-based lettings, has restricted ethnic minority access to more delineated council waiting lists.

Banking as quoted above.

This is just for the UK. The US is like that but on steroids.

[AvfcRigo82]

14 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Yes. 

Universities:

Jobs:

Housing: (from the government's racial disparity audit)

Banking as quoted above.

This is just for the UK. The US is like that but on steroids.

I find that extraordinary.

Regarding the banking sector I thought you where referring to an employee basis and not just customers as such.

Edited February 17, 2018 by AvfcRigo82

[Vive_La_Villa]

8 minutes ago, AvfcRigo82 said:

I find that extraordinary.

Look at the numbers used in studies. 3000 job applicants is a very small number when there are more than 5 million people in the UK of the races mentioned. 

Edited February 17, 2018 by Vive_La_Villa

[snowychap]

4 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Look at the numbers used in studies. 3000 job applicants for people with a population of over 5 million people? Hmmm

Sorry? What?

[Vive_La_Villa]

2 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Sorry? What?

Rephrased. 

[mjmooney]

6 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

The last one is very interesting. I still don't get why Indians don't seem to have the same issues as Black, Bangladeshi and Pakistani people in the uk. 

Strange.  That sauce must be doing wonders for us. 

Some wild guessing here, trying to fathom the mindset and weird perceptions of the white racist (partly based on people I've spoken to, some of them in my family)...

Afro-Carribeans - PROs = mostly Christian (minus points for Rastas), play football, soul/disco/rap and (less so) reggae are popular with white folks. CONS = they look different. 

Indians - PROs = perceived as dilgent, conventional hard workers. Mostly happy to fit in as regular employees. Sikhism and Hinduism perceived as odd, but harmless, compared with Islam. Caucasian features. CONS = not many, really. 

Pakistanis/Bangladeshis - PROs = nothing much. CONs = Islam, Islam, Islam (this is MASSIVE, fuelled by the right wing media). Perceived as insular, running their own businesses for their own benefit. Basically, Muslims are what Jews were for centuries - the enemy within, not to be trusted. 

It's all daft stereotyping, but it's very hard to break. 

[Rugeley Villa]

3 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Some wild guessing here, trying to fathom the mindset and weird perceptions of the white racist (partly based on people I've spoken to, some of them in my family)...

Afro-Carribeans - PROs = mostly Christian (minus points for Rastas), play football, soul/disco/rap and (less so) reggae are popular with white folks. CONS = they look different. 

Indians - PROs = perceived as dilgent, conventional hard workers. Mostly happy to fit in as regular employees. Sikhism and Hinduism perceived as odd, but harmless, compared with Islam. Caucasian features. CONS = not many, really. 

Pakistanis/Bangladeshis - PROs = nothing much. CONs = Islam, Islam, Islam (this is MASSIVE, fuelled by the right wing media). Perceived as insular, running their own businesses for their own benefit. Basically, Muslims are what Jews were for centuries - the enemy within, not to be trusted. 

It's all daft stereotyping, but it's very hard to break. 

You make a great point there. I know a few people who see it like that. To be honest, Muslims seem a much more closed community than the rest. That won't help either. 

[snowychap]

1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Rephrased. 

The rephrasing doesn't improve things.

What on earth does the figure of over 5 million people have to do with the task undertaken (sending 3 applications each for 987 job vacancies)?

[Keyblade]

3000 is more than an adequate sample size to draw a conclusion. Unless you expect 5 million applications to be sent? 

[Rugeley Villa]

I was at work last year, and we were on about work, and all the shit that comes with it. There was a lad there, who I get on with pretty well. He's a lovely lad, and has got 3 kids, all of them mixed race. He's married to a mixed race girl. He hates racism, and pulls people up on it. We were on about stuff anyway, and I said, yeah last week they had us working like n*****s. Straight away I knew what I'd said, and this lad went a bit quiet. He never pulled me up on it, but later that night I called him up to apologise. I don't really see myself as racist, but it was just a figure of speech. Wrong I know. 

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 minute ago, snowychap said:

The rephrasing doesn't improve things.

What on earth does the figure of over 5 million people have to do with the task undertaken (sending 3 applications each for 987 job vacancies)?

I should have read the whole article. Sorry. 

However I do agree with this :

There are limitations to the results. The researchers only used nine occupations, and I am not sure that the number of replies they received is a representative sample. We are concerned that the results will be interpreted to say that most employers are racist, whereas they prove no such thing."

[Dr_Pangloss]

2 hours ago, VILLAMARV said:

It really isn't.

No one suggested class/poverty don't have an impact. Or that being poor is easy, but if you happen to be white you've kind of proved his point there.

Why is it hard for you to accept? It's not a personal thing.

This is like some buzzfeed nonsense, the original post totally ignored the nuance of class. It is simply not the case that being born white and male instantly equals easy street. Someone who is white and poor does not have much of an advantage over someone who is not white and middle class (or wealthier). 

[Keyblade]

15 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Some wild guessing here, trying to fathom the mindset and weird perceptions of the white racist (partly based on people I've spoken to, some of them in my family)...

Afro-Carribeans - PROs = mostly Christian (minus points for Rastas), play football, soul/disco/rap and (less so) reggae are popular with white folks. CONS = they look different. 

Indians - PROs = perceived as dilgent, conventional hard workers. Mostly happy to fit in as regular employees. Sikhism and Hinduism perceived as odd, but harmless, compared with Islam. Caucasian features. CONS = not many, really. 

Pakistanis/Bangladeshis - PROs = nothing much. CONs = Islam, Islam, Islam (this is MASSIVE, fuelled by the right wing media). Perceived as insular, running their own businesses for their own benefit. Basically, Muslims are what Jews were for centuries - the enemy within, not to be trusted. 

It's all daft stereotyping, but it's very hard to break. 

I wonder where Somalis fall on the racist's hierarchy. We're basically black Pakistanis without any of the pros if being black and all the cons of being Pakistani

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 minute ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

This is like some buzzfeed nonsense, the original post totally ignored the nuance of class. It is simply not the case that being born white and male instantly equals easy street. Someone who is white and poor does not have much of an advantage over someone who is not white and middle class (or wealthier). 

Nobody cares about white poor people. It's almost like they do not exist. 

[Rugeley Villa]

1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Nobody cares about white poor people. It's almost like they do not exist. 

A poor black person is poor because he is black, and has not been given a chance. As you say, nobody gives a shit about the poor white folk. They have no excuse for being poor, and have no boundaries to overcome. 

[Keyblade]

3 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

This is like some buzzfeed nonsense, the original post totally ignored the nuance of class. It is simply not the case that being born white and male instantly equals easy street. Someone who is white and poor does not have much of an advantage over someone who is not white and middle class (or wealthier). 

If the obstacles that are there for other people aren't there for you, doesn't that make your path inherently easier relatively speaking?

That there are other unique individual obstacles that people may face in their lives that make them hard is irrelevant to this point. 

You're misunderstanding the point being made as "if you're born white you're automatically born into an easy life without any hardships". Obviously this isn't true, but that was never the point being made.

[Vive_La_Villa]

6 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

I wonder where Somalis fall on the racist's hierarchy. We're basically black Pakistanis without any of the pros if being black and all the cons of being Pakistani

I beleive most Somalis in the Uk live in and around London. Not many in the midlands at all. Sterotype wise, from my experience it's not the best unfortunately. 

[snowychap]

16 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I should have read the whole article. Sorry. 

Or at the very least the pertinent bits that explain the basis for the size of the sample.

Quote

However I do agree with this :

There are limitations to the results. The researchers only used nine occupations, and I am not sure that the number of replies they received is a representative sample. We are concerned that the results will be interpreted to say that most employers are racist, whereas they prove no such thing."

That's the opinion of the Chamber of Commerce's employment policy advisor who necessarily has an interest in promoting the case for employers.

Her criticism may well have merit but it would carry more weight if shewere to go in to more detailed criticism of the methodology used in determining the sample size, why this wasn't a representative sample and what she thought would be an appropriate representative sample that she wouldn't then write off.

The next paragraph perhaps suggests the attitude she had to the report from the start (and therefore to any inferences drawn from the results):

Quote

Morris also questioned whether the government should be involved in using a "sting operation" to uncover racism in the middle of a recession and whether it was worth the money. "Business is struggling with the worst recession for a generation. Is this really the time to be wasting government resources and the time of hard-pressed companies with fake CVs?" she asked.

link

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by snowychap

[Vive_La_Villa]

Just now, snowychap said:

Or at the very least the pertinent bits that explain the basis for the size of the sample.

That's the opinion of the Chamber of Commerce's employment policy advisor who necessarily has an interest in promoting the case for employers.

Her criticism may well have merit but it would carry more weight if shewere to go in to more detailed criticism of the methodology used in determining the sample size, why this wasn't a representative sample and what she thought would be an appropriate representative sample that she wouldn't then write off.

The next paragraph perhaps suggests the attitude she had to the report from the start (and therefore any inferences drawn from the results):

 

I agree with the last part too. Money should have been spent on the NHS.