Does this offend any of you?

[heymike]

This paragraph is a cut-paste from the bottom of an employment ad:

"Because the BCTF has an affirmative action policy, an applicant may wish to provide, on a voluntary basis, the information as to whether she or he is female or male, a person of colour, an Aboriginal, a person with a disability or a lesbian or gay. "

So, just wondering your thoughts on it. Personally, I am not a fan and think they should fire the responsible section of administration. Why would sexual preference have any bearing what so ever, would I be a shoe-in for the position if I admit I have 350GB of tranny porn on my harddrive, perhaps they would like to know that I am very pro-lesbian as long as they are not too-butchy.

[BananaHunter]

Yeah it pisses me off a little. Affirmative action is ********. It's as bad as justifying a war based on religion.

You don't have to give the info, but they don't have to hire you either. Another really dumb HR thing. I don't think HR actively goes out to hire a gay/lesbian/tranny. I think it's for reporting purposes only.

[gei]

It's stupid and completely ridiculous.

If I were you I would just tell them you're gay to get you a better chance.

[UrbanPoet]

Yeah it pisses me off a little. Affirmative action is ********. It's as bad as justifying a war based on religion.

You don't have to give the info, but they don't have to hire you either. Another really dumb HR thing. I don't think HR actively goes out to hire a gay/lesbian/tranny. I think it's for reporting purposes only.

yep.. exactly...
I thinkthey slip in the "we are a diversifed work placE" just so they can say they are a 'diversified work place'.
But i havent seen any ads that go as far as the OP's.

[Sylvestre]

Why blame the company, they are only trying to operate as they are forced to by the government?

[f00kie]

I've seen this fairly frequently. It's not the company's fault; as another poster said, it's because of the government. It's the one collecting this info.

[heymike]

Sorry, to clarify....If it was a private company I would be indifferent. I have seen these before on a lot of crown co's and such, not sure why this one sticks out though.

The BCFT is the British Columbia Federation of Teachers, which I believe is funded by the Ministry of Education. So the individual that fills this position will be taking in $94k/annum of taxpayer money and will be effecting financial policies and considerations of all of BC schools....I don't know, sexual orientation, or lack thereof, should not be included in the ad for such a position.

[molala]

Sorry, to clarify....If it was a private company I would be indifferent. I have seen these before on a lot of crown co's and such, not sure why this one sticks out though.

The BCFT is the British Columbia Federation of Teachers, which I believe is funded by the Ministry of Education. So the individual that fills this position will be taking in $94k/annum of taxpayer money and will be effecting financial policies and considerations of all of BC schools....I don't know, sexual orientation, or lack thereof, should not be included in the ad for such a position.

mind you there are a lot of government job postings asking people to disclose these information voluntarily to show they welcome diversity....in fact..they do...many government agencies would hire people based on race rather than intelligence...

at least you could answer them on a voluntary based...i once applied a company based in the states and they asked me whether or not i have any tatoo or piercing during our first telephone conversation

[Firebot]

Any large company who has a contract with the federal government must follow an affirmative action plan or risk the loss of their contract. And yes, that means in an IT market women will be taken over men of similar experience simply because they need to raise their man to woman quota. If the company does not meet the mandated quota it must show proof of a strong effort to advertise jobs towards minority groups.

It's a legal form of discrimination called the Employment Equity Act.

http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/labour/equality/index.shtml

All of these companies in this list have to abide by this act too.

http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/lp/lo/lswe/we/ee_tools/employers/leep/index-we.shtml

[BananaHunter]

In all of the jobs I've had, there are more females than males in the office. I get the impression that more guys are now stuck driving taxis and grunt work. I also think statements like "men make more money than women" is because of the extreme outliers (top management) and the fact that many women choose to work "less". If you take those out, I'm starting to think women make more then men in this country. So with this kind of upbringing, I think affirmative action is absolutely ********.

Of course, this is based on my experience in the workforce which is a pretty small sample.

[random pattern]

Any large company who has a contract with the federal government must follow an affirmative action plan or risk the loss of their contract. And yes, that means in an IT market women will be taken over men of similar experience simply because they need to raise their man to woman quota. If the company does not meet the mandated quota it must show proof of a strong effort to advertise jobs towards minority groups.

It's a legal form of discrimination called the Employment Equity Act.

http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/labour/equality/index.shtml

All of these companies in this list have to abide by this act too.

http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/lp/lo/lswe/we/ee_tools/employers/leep/index-we.shtml

from your link:


Employment Equity Act:
The Act contains eight key elements as outlined below:

... ... ...

2. Designated Group Members
Four groups are designated: women, aboriginal peoples, members of visible minorities, and persons with disabilities. The principle of self-identification is affirmed and definitions of the groups are in the legislation itself.

3. Employer Obligations
Clarifies existing employer obligations to implement employment equity without imposing overly onerous obligations.

Establishes the same core requirements for public and private sector employers for developing and implementing employment equity plans and programs.

Clarifies that implementing employment equity does not require quotas, measures that cause undue hardship for an employer, the creation of new positions, the hiring or promotion of unqualified individuals, or hiring and promotion without regard for the merit principle in the public sector.

[teufel-man]

I also think statements like "men make more money than women" is because of the extreme outliers (top management) and the fact that many women choose to work "less".



not trying to be sexist here, but I find the average women is less ambitious than the average male in terms of wanting to continuosly move up in a company and eventually reach top management. I find that a lot of women just get to a comfortable position in a company and then realise that it suits their life the best, i.e. enough pay, decent hours, less stress etc. (its not a bad thing)

For example, look at this forum (careers forum)... as far as I can tell its pretty much all guys (not 100%, but a large percentage)

Another thing I noticed about working with women is a lot of them let their emotions get in the way and prevent them from doing their job most effectively. There are definitely a lot of women who do NOT fall into this category and are very successful and move up in companies. However, on average, I think a higher percentage of women dont have the 'emotional strength' to be top leaders.

I am not trying to be rude here... I was always under the impression that women had a 'glass ceiling' because men didnt want them joining the 'old boys club', but after having worked in a big corp. I saw why there were only a select few women who moved up in the organizations.

Do you guys feel the same way or am I just a bastard?

[sillysimms]

In all of the jobs I've had, there are more females than males in the office. I get the impression that more guys are now stuck driving taxis and grunt work. I also think statements like "men make more money than women" is because of the extreme outliers (top management) and the fact that many women choose to work "less". If you take those out, I'm starting to think women make more then men in this country. So with this kind of upbringing, I think affirmative action is absolutely ********.

Of course, this is based on my experience in the workforce which is a pretty small sample.

Like you said, this is based on a small sample of your experience but is not at all supported by statistical data. I studied this area in university and there are a multitude of reasons why women earn less than men and are concentrated in certain careers sectors, but women on average (there are exceptions for both men and women) earn significantly less than men. Without going into a full analysis of the data and reasons, here is some info (a few years old) that I found quickly by googling:

The average earnings of employed women are still substantially lower than those of men, even when they are employed on a full-time basis.

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/060307/d060307a.htm
In 2003, women working on a full-time, full-year basis had average earnings of $36,500, or 71% what their male counterparts made.

As well, the gap between the earnings of women and men has not changed substantially in the past decade.

Women make up a disproportionate share of the population in Canada with low incomes as measured by Statistics Canada's low income cut-off (LICO) on an after-tax basis. Unattached women are particularly likely to have low incomes.

not trying to be sexist here, but I find the average women is less ambitious than the average male in terms of wanting to continuosly move up in a company and eventually reach top management. I find that a lot of women just get to a comfortable position in a company and then realise that it suits their life the best, i.e. enough pay, decent hours, less stress etc. (its not a bad thing)

For example, look at this forum (careers forum)... as far as I can tell its pretty much all guys (not 100%, but a large percentage)

Another thing I noticed about working with women is a lot of them let their emotions get in the way and prevent them from doing their job most effectively. There are definitely a lot of women who do NOT fall into this category and are very successful and move up in companies. However, on average, I think a higher percentage of women dont have the 'emotional strength' to be top leaders.

I am not trying to be rude here... I was always under the impression that women had a 'glass ceiling' because men didnt want them joining the 'old boys club', but after having worked in a big corp. I saw why there were only a select few women who moved up in the organizations.

Do you guys feel the same way or am I just a bastard?

I like to hear other people's opinions and don't think you're a bastard:cheesygri

I am a female and I do disagree or at least feel there are extenuating circumstances that need to be discussed when dealing with the issues you raised.

For example you say "average women is less ambitious than the average male ... a lot of women just get to a comfortable position in a company and then realise that it suits their life the best, i.e. enough pay, decent hours, less stress etc."

Statistics also show that when there is a 2 parent family and both parents work outside the home for equal hours, the vast majority of the housework/child care still falls on the woman. There are many studies on it, this one isn't the best example, but I found it quickly:

http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_21434.aspx
"Getting married is a high point in most women's lives, but it comes with at least one burden they may not have expected - extra housework. According to a study from the University of Michigan, the average woman adds seven hours a week to her weekly burden simply by getting hitched.

They discovered that single women only performed about 12 hours of chores a week. But their married counterparts, especially older females in their 60s and 70s, did twice that amount. Women with three kids spent a good 28 hours getting everything done they felt was needed. But for married men with the same number of children, the workload was just 10 hours."

Regarding men and women and emotions. Men and women are different. I don't think there is a right or a wrong here. There is just what people are generally used to and historically that has been male managers.

Recent statistics have shown that with the same education, men and women make virtually the same amount of money if the woman does not marry and does not have children. However, once a woman marries or has children, her earnings and future earning power tend to drop significantly for the reasons of mentioned plus others.

So I personally do not feel that women lack ambition or the interest in moving up in companies and earning more money but their are often societal reasons that prevent them from doing so.

There is also the subject of equal pay for equal work. Historically a lot of work considered "women's work" was low paying (e.g. daycare). There is a lot of responsibility involved in caring for children but many of these positions are still very low paying. Unions were historically male dominated and many fought to keep women out as they felt wages would be lowered. However, these were generally fields that were male dominated and still enjoy higher than average pay because of their history. Just a quick example off the top of my head (not the best) but the person selling you TTC tokens makes substantially more money than the person caring for you child at the daycare (despite the fact that daycare is expensive, the workers in most cases aren't highly paid even with an ECE diploma).

[KonaHeiHei]

I get the 'idea' behind the question but I don't get the poin! If the reader is presented with "we don't discriminate ....." but we want you to check these categories you belong to ..... why the ******** ask the question to begin with. If it doesn't matter don't ask the questions. And if it does, I'll be more than happy to check as many as possible. I don't believe for a second that these 'anonymous' replies don't actually lead to more chances of getting an interview.

I would add though that in gov't buildings and surrounding buildings in Ottawa where I've worked 70% or more of the workers at all levels are women. Mostly all French first langauge too. There's a lot of men working in the RCMP and DND. The other major employers are almost 50 - 50. I think the 'bigger' sales jobs and finance are skewed towards males. But the Fed gov't certainly lives to the 'T' on these quotas.

edit: @ teufel-man
Perhaps they are 'less motivated'. Way I see it, they're probably just smarter. I figure they don't want to make their career their life and don't care about money as much.

[CSR]

not trying to be sexist here, but I find the average women is less ambitious than the average male in terms of wanting to continuosly move up in a company and eventually reach top management. I find that a lot of women just get to a comfortable position in a company and then realise that it suits their life the best, i.e. enough pay, decent hours, less stress etc. (its not a bad thing)

For example, look at this forum (careers forum)... as far as I can tell its pretty much all guys (not 100%, but a large percentage)

Another thing I noticed about working with women is a lot of them let their emotions get in the way and prevent them from doing their job most effectively. There are definitely a lot of women who do NOT fall into this category and are very successful and move up in companies. However, on average, I think a higher percentage of women dont have the 'emotional strength' to be top leaders.

I am not trying to be rude here... I was always under the impression that women had a 'glass ceiling' because men didnt want them joining the 'old boys club', but after having worked in a big corp. I saw why there were only a select few women who moved up in the organizations.

Do you guys feel the same way or am I just a bastard?

To some extent... I

[heymikey]

Oh no... with a username like that, people might think I'm you.