On 17-Jul-08 22:48, Gail Shaw wrote:
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
> news:487fa85a@news.povray.org...
>> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> Ooo, that would probably *incrase* your changes of being hired - they
>>> have to hire a certain percentage of "minority groups" to prove that
>>> they are in fact an "equal opportunities employer". (I'm not making this
>>> up. Several questions are explicitly marked as being for this purpose.)
>>   That's one of the curious symptoms of the modern western
> hypercorrectism:
>> You have to discriminate in order to be an "equal opportunity" firm. Quite
>> ironically, "equal opportunity" is the politically correct term for "we
>> choose some of our employees based on ethnicity and other irrelevant
>> details" (which, at the same time, is the definition of racism).
>>
> 
> If you want really messed up, try South Africa.
> 
> It is illegal, forbidden by our constitution, to discriminate against anyone
> on the basis of skin colour, gender, religion, sexual preference or
> nationality.
> It is a requirement of the labour law that all companies employing more than
> 50 people, have an affirmative action employment policy, whereby jobs are
> given by preference to 'previously disadvantaged individuals'
> 
If such a policy is in place, it becomes relatively less easy for a 
white guy to find a job. So when it is in place for some time...

Probably does not work that way.

Post a reply to this message