Political Crossfire Forums

Revenant · Joined: 16 Apr 2006 Posts: 17927 Location: Bliss

No, this is not a debate about Affirmative Action, although it may come up anyway.

My main question is, is it okay to determine who you hire for a company based on race if you wish to maintain a certain image for your company?

For example, playing off stereotypes, let's just say I am a CEO of a rap music record label. Doesn't it make more sense to hire an African American to deal with negotiations when signing people to my label? Or is this just way off base?

Ameriman · Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Posts: 10775

Revenant wrote: No, this is not a debate about Affirmative Action, although it may come up anyway.

My main question is, is it okay to determine who you hire for a company based on race if you wish to maintain a certain image for your company?

For example, playing off stereotypes, let's just say I am a CEO of a rap music record label. Doesn't it make more sense to hire an African American to deal with negotiations when signing people to my label? Or is this just way off base?

It's a hard call given race rarely has anything to do with the capability of an individual. So you would be hiring them because of the way they look...not who may be best for the job.

I think another way to look at it is, say you own a store in the most remote, ho-dunk area of Alabama where racism is rampant (just an example). Would it be ok for a white employer to turn down someone based on race because his customer base won't shop there if he hires a minority?

micfranklin · Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 12:21 pm Post subject:

First off, let me say that in some cases race is a factor when hiring, and its not okay to hire someone based on race and to keep a good image for said company.

Revenant · Joined: 16 Apr 2006 Posts: 17927 Location: Bliss

It poses a major problem. Certainly we shouldn't discriminate based on race. But sometimes it is advantageous and sometimes necessary for companies to hire people based on their image, in this case race.

Ameriman · Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Posts: 10775

I think it would be irresponsible for company leaders to not take into account the fact that the American people are naive, ignorant, a-holes who have no concept of equality or tolerance. Is that the company's fault?

Tono · Joined: 23 Jan 2005 Posts: 11742 Location: Mounted

Revenant wrote: My main question is, is it okay to determine who you hire for a company based on race if you wish to maintain a certain image for your company?

That depends on two things:

1. Is anyone going to sue you over it?

2. How good is your lawyer?

Ameriman · Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Posts: 10775

Tono wrote: Revenant wrote: My main question is, is it okay to determine who you hire for a company based on race if you wish to maintain a certain image for your company?

That depends on two things:

1. Is anyone going to sue you over it?

2. How good is your lawyer? :lol:

Gus · Joined: 17 Jun 2005 Posts: 7609 Location: Tampa, FL

Well you could look at the same scenario from a different perspective: does a black have a right to a job just because he's black?

Aqualung · Joined: 03 Jun 2006 Posts: 2260 Location: Washington

Revenant wrote: No, this is not a debate about Affirmative Action, although it may come up anyway.

My main question is, is it okay to determine who you hire for a company based on race if you wish to maintain a certain image for your company?

For example, playing off stereotypes, let's just say I am a CEO of a rap music record label. Doesn't it make more sense to hire an African American to deal with negotiations when signing people to my label? Or is this just way off base?
Yes, I believe it should be. On the other side of the coin, what if my clientel generally tend to be white and racist? It would severly hurt my business to hire minorities, and I nobody should be able to tell me I have to hire so many people of a minority, especially if it will hurt my business.

Aqualung · Joined: 03 Jun 2006 Posts: 2260 Location: Washington

Revenant wrote: It poses a major problem. Certainly we shouldn't discriminate based on race. But sometimes it is advantageous and sometimes necessary for companies to hire people based on their image, in this case race.
We should be allowed to discriminate on any basis we want. Nobody should force us to be courteous or accepting.

Silkheat · Joined: 06 Sep 2005 Posts: 5981 Location: Austin

Revenant wrote: No, this is not a debate about Affirmative Action, although it may come up anyway.

My main question is, is it okay to determine who you hire for a company based on race if you wish to maintain a certain image for your company?

For example, playing off stereotypes, let's just say I am a CEO of a rap music record label. Doesn't it make more sense to hire an African American to deal with negotiations when signing people to my label? Or is this just way off base?

If it is a private company then yes, as a person can do what they like with their company.

Personaly I can understand it as with minorities you hire potential liabilities through law suits.

Silkheat · Joined: 06 Sep 2005 Posts: 5981 Location: Austin

Revenant wrote: It poses a major problem. Certainly we shouldn't discriminate based on race. But sometimes it is advantageous and sometimes necessary for companies to hire people based on their image, in this case race.

If I ran an asian restraunt you better believe I would hire, gasp, asians.

micfranklin · Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 2:34 pm Post subject:

CrossEyedMary wrote: Revenant wrote: It poses a major problem. Certainly we shouldn't discriminate based on race. But sometimes it is advantageous and sometimes necessary for companies to hire people based on their image, in this case race.
We should be allowed to discriminate on any basis we want. Nobody should force us to be courteous or accepting.

Do you know how wrong that sounds? :?

Aqualung · Joined: 03 Jun 2006 Posts: 2260 Location: Washington

micfranklin wrote: CrossEyedMary wrote: Revenant wrote: It poses a major problem. Certainly we shouldn't discriminate based on race. But sometimes it is advantageous and sometimes necessary for companies to hire people based on their image, in this case race.
We should be allowed to discriminate on any basis we want. Nobody should force us to be courteous or accepting.

Do you know how wrong that sounds? :?
No. I don't. I know that it would be silly for me to simply not hire somebody because of race, but I should be allowed to make that descision if I wanted to.

Revenant · Joined: 16 Apr 2006 Posts: 17927 Location: Bliss

CrossEyedMary wrote: micfranklin wrote: CrossEyedMary wrote: Revenant wrote: It poses a major problem. Certainly we shouldn't discriminate based on race. But sometimes it is advantageous and sometimes necessary for companies to hire people based on their image, in this case race.
We should be allowed to discriminate on any basis we want. Nobody should force us to be courteous or accepting.

Do you know how wrong that sounds? :?
No. I don't. I know that it would be silly for me to simply not hire somebody because of race, but I should be allowed to make that descision if I wanted to.

Doesn't this go against every legal decision throughout the 1960's in the Warren court. To overturn those would set us back a long long way. And imagine the outrage in the African American community if people were allowed to not hire someone simply because of the color of their skin (which probably effects them the most).

Aqualung · Joined: 03 Jun 2006 Posts: 2260 Location: Washington

Revenant wrote: Doesn't this go against every legal decision throughout the 1960's in the Warren court. To overturn those would set us back a long long way. And imagine the outrage in the African American community if people were allowed to not hire someone simply because of the color of their skin (which probably effects them the most).
But how many people would do this? They might at first, until they started losing the business of the minorities who heard about their racist hiring practices, and the white people who didn't agree with that sort of thing. As it is, though, I have a right to be rude to people. I have a right to be racist. I have a right to not hire people because I'm racist.

Now, before people misinterpret this, I'm NOT racist, and if I owned a business I WOULDN'T refuse to hire people based on race, but that doesn't change the fact that I should be forced to simply because people find it unpalatable that anybody would have racist notions.

Revenant · Joined: 16 Apr 2006 Posts: 17927 Location: Bliss

CrossEyedMary wrote: Revenant wrote: Doesn't this go against every legal decision throughout the 1960's in the Warren court. To overturn those would set us back a long long way. And imagine the outrage in the African American community if people were allowed to not hire someone simply because of the color of their skin (which probably effects them the most).
But how many people would do this? They might at first, until they started losing the business of the minorities who heard about their racist hiring practices, and the white people who didn't agree with that sort of thing. As it is, though, I have a right to be rude to people. I have a right to be racist. I have a right to not hire people because I'm racist.

Now, before people misinterpret this, I'm NOT racist, and if I owned a business I WOULDN'T refuse to hire people based on race, but that doesn't change the fact that I should be forced to simply because people find it unpalatable that anybody would have racist notions.

I agree with you on the libertarian principle on this issue. However, if you were a politician, how would you sell such a thing to the public? Forcing the public to be responsible is a tough pill for them to swallow.

sparsely · Joined: 20 May 2006 Posts: 2296 Location: Passamaquoddy

CrossEyedMary wrote: micfranklin wrote: CrossEyedMary wrote: Revenant wrote: It poses a major problem. Certainly we shouldn't discriminate based on race. But sometimes it is advantageous and sometimes necessary for companies to hire people based on their image, in this case race.
We should be allowed to discriminate on any basis we want. Nobody should force us to be courteous or accepting.

Do you know how wrong that sounds? :?
No. I don't. I know that it would be silly for me to simply not hire somebody because of race, but I should be allowed to make that descision if I wanted to.

The thing is, people still make that decision, and can hide behind a number of stated reasons which are, by appearances, not racist at all.

The state sanctioned racism for a long time, using it as an issue to win votes. Not much different than politicians use abortion, gay rights and all that non-issue crap as distraction.
So should the state be somewhat responsible for helping correct the environment of social injustice and prejudice it fostered?
It would seem the only just thing to do.

Of course we know we can't make someone hire anyone, but we can tell by looking at a company's staff whether there is something funny going on with their hiring practices.
And yes, I believe we should look more closely at those who seem suspicious.

In the case of Silkheat's asian restaurant, hiring asian waitstaff and those who come into contact with the public would be understandable.
But if the same restaurant consistently turned down other racial groups for positions like dishwasher and whatnot, I'd definitely say it should be the focus of at least a civil suit.

Revenant · Joined: 16 Apr 2006 Posts: 17927 Location: Bliss

sparsely wrote: CrossEyedMary wrote: micfranklin wrote: CrossEyedMary wrote: Revenant wrote: It poses a major problem. Certainly we shouldn't discriminate based on race. But sometimes it is advantageous and sometimes necessary for companies to hire people based on their image, in this case race.
We should be allowed to discriminate on any basis we want. Nobody should force us to be courteous or accepting.

Do you know how wrong that sounds? :?
No. I don't. I know that it would be silly for me to simply not hire somebody because of race, but I should be allowed to make that descision if I wanted to.

The thing is, people still make that decision, and can hide behind a number of stated reasons which are, by appearances, not racist at all.

The state sanctioned racism for a long time, using it as an issue to win votes. Not much different than politicians use abortion, gay rights and all that non-issue crap as distraction.
So should the state be somewhat responsible for helping correct the environment of social injustice and prejudice it fostered?
It would seem the only just thing to do.

Of course we know we can't make someone hire anyone, but we can tell by looking at a company's staff whether there is something funny going on with their hiring practices.
And yes, I believe we should look more closely at those who seem suspicious.

In the case of Silkheat's asian restaurant, hiring asian waitstaff and those who come into contact with the public would be understandable.
But if the same restaurant consistently turned down other racial groups for positions like dishwasher and whatnot, I'd definitely say it should be the focus of at least a civil suit.

What is wrong with hiring only asians? It's an asian restaurant. For it to be authentic, the entire staff ought to be asian, even down to the lowliest dishwasher. It's the image he wants for his restaurant, so what's wrong with him only hiring asians?

sparsely · Joined: 20 May 2006 Posts: 2296 Location: Passamaquoddy

Revenant wrote: What is wrong with hiring only asians? It's an asian restaurant. For it to be authentic, the entire staff ought to be asian, even down to the lowliest dishwasher. It's the image he wants for his restaurant, so what's wrong with him only hiring asians?

I didn't say there was anything wrong with hiring asians, but there is somethign wrong with not hiring others just based on their ethnicity.

If I opened a bank and used nothing but white people, would that be okay?
Just for it to be authentic. ;-)