I am sure any woman looking for her first job in the 60s or 70s would understand your point of view exactly, women were the most discriminated against non-minority at that time.
My interview with the Civil Service was a joke, there was an interviewer flanked by two 'supporters' all men. The interviewer asked me to solve a calculus question (integration by parts) which I did, he looked at it briefly and handed it to one of the 'supporters' who gave a slight nod. I had already decided the interviewer was on another planet. Â
"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."Â Sir Terry Pratchett
I can't comment on your circumstances specifically as I have no knowledge. What I would say though is that if anyone thought they'd been discriminated against, then in a way it's their responsibility to report it or else discrimination just continues. I know that's easier said than done but it's the same in all walks of life eh? If you see something that is wrong and don't tell the people who have the power to fix it, then it just perpetuates.
Then it becomes a case of who monitors those monitoring the system doesn't it? And if people are serious about fighting discrimination, they (those overseeing the system) both need to be accountable and to need the bottle to actually do something if discrimination, at whatever level, is proven - not to introduce more discrimination, under the guise of it being 'positive', as a cop out. Why would/how could you ever need 'positive' discrimination if discrimination was being effectively rooted out? You can't root out discrimination without rooting out 'positive' discrimination.
As for Universities, their courses and their suitability for an ever changing job market, that is separate curmudgeonly issue - especially in a day and age where to get any job you need a degree. It always makes me smile when watching the Christmas Uni Challenge - seeing what degrees were studied and what careers the people took.
These are troubled times, the SM’s are stretched,  the drivers, poor sods are flat out. My sons got twice as much work as he had before and every wants it yesterday. Does anyone spare a thought for anyone else but themselves these days.Â
Rant over, best not look in this thread anymore.Â
Supermarkets are making massive profits by treating their staff like crap. Blaming the customers for moaning about the poor service they're getting is not exactly pointing the finger of shame in the right direction. How bad is the service allowed to get before we're justified in complaining? It's unacceptable to direct complaints at the staff of course but supermarkets can't just keep allowing these conditions to occur just because we should be grateful we're getting anything at all.
If you can keep your head, while those around you are losing theirs, you may not have grasped the seriousness of the situation.
I'm not sure about equal pay. it frustrates the hell out of me when equal pay is quoted in unequal situations. You cannot compare sectors that rely on the 'appeal' of the workers. An actor draws crowds. If one actor draws a bigger crowd than another, personally I think they deserve a bigger share. A local football club has announced it will pay women the same as men - I don't think that's right if one team or the other is a bigger attraction - if the women pull in a bigger crowd, why should the men get the same pay? Ditto for any sector where personality and attraction is the draw.
If any person is paid by their time and is doing the same job as someone else, then you would think they deserve the same pay eh? I would. But we all know that it doesn't work that way - and we benefit from it. We buy the goods that are made cheaply - we don't care. We move jobs when we see others doing the same job being paid more - how many people do you know who moved jobs to be paid more for the same work? It happens between men, between women, between members of the same ethnic group. Business always has (or has before AI and robotics take over) chased cheap labour - whether that's based on ethnicity, sex, age - whatever. We all see that. When our country is too expensive - they (ubiquitous) move to cheaper regions. If they can pay a pittance, they will and the consumer turns a blind eye. We all know that one of the reasons for leaving the EU is to get away from the rules and regs that try to keep a level playing field across the members. We don't care. We vote with our feet; we change jobs if we think we're being unfairly treated rather than tackling the inequality - and our feet have also led us away from unions that fought for the equalities.
It's not just women not getting equal pay - we still have a massive issue with people in this country not getting minimum wage (https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7735/). It's known - it's ignored. That's why I said it comes down to whether the monitors have the bottle and ability to do anything about it. I'd put positive discrimination in with zero hour contracts as things to be banned.
I don't think I ever wanted to earn the same as anybody. I never thought that way - I just looked at a job ad, saw where the job was and if I fancied it and the money was enough, went for it.
I'm not religious, but it's a bit like the vineyard worker's tale in the Bible - if I was happy with the conditions I signed up to, why would I then complain? Odd how things from school stuck with me.
Totally. That's why the Unions and Labour have been so critical to this country (and the world in general) to help regulate the excesses of capitalism. And why the vineyard parable is only half of an interesting story.
I'm more right than I am left - but we need curbs on both sides and something with teeth that then enforces what the law says. And the law can't be weighted in favour of business and money. So whether it is equal pay or minimum pay or ... whatever there needs to be somewhere Jo(e) Bloggs can turn to for redress. Gov is happy putting in rules to gain votes, but no so good at making sure those rules are adhered to when it's no longer a vote winner. Cynical moi?
Whether it is infuriating or not though doesn't alter the fact that you know the conditions before you sign up to them. I know that's hard when you have Hobson's choice - but in those conditions it matters not if you're male/female/black/yellow/pink/disabled/gay/a child - (because there's injustice across them all) does it? It's the injustice that's wrong. The conditions that you sign up to have to be fair in the first place.
To be perfectly honest it doesn't concern me that much and I don't really care that presenter 'x' who's getting £n00,000 isn't on the same as presenter 'y' who's getting £n,000,000. And? But I am concerned when some poor sod is getting <£8 an hour on a zero hour contract and the Gov keeps repeating that people love zero hour contracts.
Some of us are people and some of us are just human resources ( I've always found that term offensive) People who matter ( to the government), do indeed, love zero hour contracts and consider the minimum wage to be over-generous.
No (and yes!) - that is why I said that the vineyard parable is half the story. I personally think that the Unions are the only way to stand up to business. To me, the basic conditions of a job - all jobs - (ie min holiday, min pay, max working hours, equality rights etc) should be negotiated by a body that has sway. That has taken time, but appeared to work to a degree. So at the moment - yes - the person who signs up for zero hours knows the conditions and the choice is theirs, BUT, also no in as much as that condition should not be allowed in the first place to sign up to. Basic working conditions should be defined and enforced. Much the same as people should never be put on a 'positive' discrimination list. They're both just wrong. Zero hours means there isn't a job, and 'positive' discrimination says what it does - discriminates.
Posts
My interview with the Civil Service was a joke, there was an interviewer flanked by two 'supporters' all men. The interviewer asked me to solve a calculus question (integration by parts) which I did, he looked at it briefly and handed it to one of the 'supporters' who gave a slight nod. I had already decided the interviewer was on another planet.Â
Â
People who matter ( to the government), do indeed, love zero hour contracts and consider the minimum wage to be over-generous.