Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirrel
that is true, i am the most awesome person ive ever met
|
you are the most awesome person i've never met.
(sorry, i just had to force the second page)
there are some companies that take AffAct as the letter of the law, and follow it without fail. i think it's better to show that your hiring practices are demonstrative of the employment pool as opposed to hiring a percentage of a certain race just because the law says i should.
i'm not a racist. if you knew anything about me, you would know that to be true. when hiring, i would sometimes ask questions that were on the borderline, but they were to gain insight into the interviewee more than anything else.
like i said, i had very little time in order to find out if someone would fit the opening. sure, personality has a lot to do with how someone will be on the job.
if all things were equal, i would hire the more intelligent person. unfortunately, not all things are equal, and i've had to pass on some people i would have thought would be an asset to the company.
besides, in my role i never had the final word on hiring. i could recommend for hire, or recommend we pass on an applicant. i could have been trumped very easily by those above my pay grade.
anything that you write, or don't write, on an application is fair game for questioning. sometimes those questions can catch you off guard , in that you weren't prepared to answer them.
the only racism that is practiced in hiring today seems to be those that follow AffAct.
