Employers are choosing the best person for the job. Meaning the one who will cost less and bring in money. And no matter what you think, there are some people who are a risk for an employer. People who have risky behaviors, who have more chance of taking a day off, or who will be less productive. That's what an employer is looking at. "Will this guy/girl be absent a lot? Will he ask me for some special treatement? Will he have issues with his coworkers? Will he cost me more than he bring in?" And yes, there are some community/groups where issues are more likely. As an example, here, in France, we have problems with quite a good numbers of muslims who, in their company, are asking for days off for muslims holidays, or a special room to pray, or refuse to shake hands and talk to women, or even, for the bus drivers, to sit in a bus right after a woman driver. All of this is known by the employer, and he knows that he may have problems if he hire some people.
At least in my state, companies are required to provide proof that they hire according to the standards of equal opportunity. That means that being female, being a minority, being disabled, being a veteran, etc. are all factors that, if possessed by a candidate, give the company an edge in meeting their "equal opportunity quota".
Ironically, in an effort to make businesses less racist and sexist, companies are encouraged to actively give preference to candidates by merit of race and gender.
Since I'm a white male, I prefer giving ambiguous responses, as my race and sex do nothing for my resume. At least I can include I'm a veteran though.
Yes. For some companies, it is a matter of meeting quotas... we need X-number of women, minorities, disabled persons to look diverse as a company. For others it is a matter of keeping the status quo... we don't hire "those people," for whatever sexist/racist reason. For others they are much more concerned with what applicants are actually qualified to do, but may still need to meet certain quotas... as in we need to hire x number of super qualified women or Hispanics, etc even if there are equally qualified white male applicants; race/sex may be a greater deciding factor. As per usual, it depends on the company and/or who is doing the hiring.
Simply put, those boxes wouldn't be there if they didn't affect the hiring process. In a world that's obsessed with making sure everything looks proportional and not according to personal achievement and choice, nearly everything gets affected by those boxes
Hell yes. I am a living statistic of that shit. I think however all the social justice awareness pressures, technology, and milinnials are all influencing employers, companies, organizations, and other institutions to reconsider their hiring practices and ethics and in some impelling them to change... I am definitely enjoying it, but not reveling in it because the marginalized are just still pretty much in the ditch because there is a far reaching system in place that needs a complete overhaul, that will require time, changes of attitudes, and implementation not just talking about it (good start though). Go America lol
I absolutely think it does, and that’s problematic for me. A persons race, sexual orientation or ethnicity has nothing to do with their qualification for the job they are applying for. Now, some companies do have diversity quotas (which is so politically correct it makes me sick), so they need to make sure they have the right mix of employees.
I run a business, and I hire the most qualified person for the job, period. That’s all that matters to me.. who is the most qualified.
If we are going to base future job performance on the basis of someone’s race or ethnicity, you may as well ask their favorite color too and just decide based on that.
no, my last name is undeniably anglo and i used my American first name when i applied for an American company so i went for an interview the interviewer was confused like "are you sure you're ○○○○○○○?" and when i said yes he was like "hmm you don't look like it" but they gave me the job anyway.
Obviously. By law a job cannot discriminate based on this information. Ok, so why the hell is it still on the damn application? Employers are most definitely still utilizing this information in making choices as to who should be hired. Otherwise, the questions wouldn't be there.
Yes , it does work in favour sometimes. I live in a country where Christian is in minority so for minority there are special reserved seats. So since we are not in the majority , I do get benifits.. plus i get special leave allowances and salary bonus
Have never seen this. The closest to me had been a medical registration at the doctors. I filled with 'homo sapiens' and no questions were arising. However, in certain cases this info looks legitimate: once we had a gay guy in customer service, and I noticed negative feedback from a number of customers. Not judging him, but he was obviously the wrong tool for the workplace.
I would love to say that at this point in our society the answer is no, but I worked at a retail store where the manager only ever interviewed people who were Caucasian. So unfortunately there are still people who are in positions of authority who are going to miss use that information. This is deeply sad because we have had the chance time and again to move Beyond this and yet there are still holdouts when cysts on Race superiority Etc
That is upsetting. I hate when people aren't given a chance because of their color/sex or given the position instead of someone more qualified because of there color/sex
There have been many studies in which it was found that people with non-Dutch names or basically another ethnicity/race are far less likely to be hired. It was even proven that a regular Dutch bloke with a criminal record was more likely to be invited than a non-ethnic Dutchie without a criminal record and same qualifications. So yes, there is certainly discrimination in the job market so ticking those boxes could definitely influence the hiring process.
You haven't worked for the government in the US have you? A friend of a friend would fire off his whole 6 person team about every 3 months until HR realized he wasn't going to put up with shit workers just for the race quota. His end team did finally end with 2 good minority workers. He's also the type of guy that wouldn't have cared if they were all female rabbits named Steve if they got the work done.
The only job I've had that was mostly male or white is the one I currently have but pretty much anyone without a criminal record and applies gets in (working in schools). Just happenstance that the majority are white males.
Well if we're talking exclusively about US Federal jobs then yes, being a minority can be an advantage. However, if we're talking about the entire job market in the US, being a minority can be a huge hinderance.
Never worked anywhere that that was an issue for anyone. Though one of my jobs did favor family connections over others so it was mainly white and hispanic.
Yes. Some people are racist. Also some people can get hired on for a "diversity hire". Both of these things happen though (at least in the usa) it is technically illegal.
Today, I think it helps applicants as much as it used to hurt them. Many companies are looking for diversity (We can debate if they are truly looking for diversity or just good publicity).
Yes they have done double blind studies. Sent out the same exact resume to the same company or bank. White Men were more likely to get loans and be hired
Home > Society & Politics > Questions > Do you think ticking the race/ethnicity/sexual orientation boxes on a job application form sometimes influences the hiring process?
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions