Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster
That's a horrible idea. It would reward those who haven't worked hard to improve themselves (aka lazy) instead of rewarding those who have worked hard, studied, stayed out of trouble and actually WANT to improve themselves.
So under your "AA" plan, two job candidates come in. We'll use myself...3 degrees (one with full scholarship) and plenty of job experience. Then we have a young man from the city who couldn't afford to go to college but also didn't work hard enough or care enough to try for a scholarship to get some further education. He's been working a part-time, minimum wage job and spends the rest of his free time hanging out in mall parking lots with his friends instead of trying to improve himself.
So...the employer wants to hire the driven, educated, experienced person...but their government-enforced quota says he needs to hire another poor person to "help them out", so he must hire the lesser-qualified candidate.
|
I agree with what you're saying but I think the intention of the idea was that if two candidiates are
equally qualified then consideration should be given to the one that is living at or near the poverty, as far as AA is concerned.