Is there any way to test someone's racist factor before hiring him or her

[The Backlash Cometh]

for a human services job? I'm just wondering because I've been very shocked by the personal opinions of someone who works in that field, and I wonder how it is that he/she has been able to do his/her job without detection?

[Kelly Rupert]

1. What do you mean?

What type of test would you use? Would you just ask? Wouldn't they lie?

Those "do you prefer white or black faces" tests you may have seen are rather risky, as no correlation has even been suggested between racist behavior and preferring caucasian features, and you can hardly refuse employment to someone simply because of preferences. Biased feelings are not crimes; it is acting upon them that is criminal.

[The Backlash Cometh]

9. Absolutely no commitment to Affirmative Action, yet works

for a corporation that does government work.

[bryant69]

19. What do you mean by no commitment to Affirmative Action?

Does he or she refuse to hire minorities? Or is an ideological questioning of Affirmative Action?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[The Backlash Cometh]

21. He/She is a racist. No commitment to AA. Believes that minorities are

getting jobs that they are not qualified for, and the white males are getting fired to make room for them.

Just wanted to talk about the two things you mentioned. No commitment versus Ideological questioning.

Obviously the former is definitely racist. The latter can potentially be racist. If someone is just now asking questions about it, never really delving into the subject before, then there is going to be that gap where ideological questioning is purely innocent, seeking answers.

I think the operative word is "ideological." Ideally, there should be no reason for Affirmative Action. We should all divorce ourselves from our bad experiences and give unconditional trust to the system. Right? No matter how we get burned by it, we should trust that nobody is rigging the system to benefit themselves and their friends. But there are a lot of reasons why this will never happen in my lifetime.

The reality is that we have destroyed in this country anything where we once found common ground. Everything is now partisan. For example, civil servants use to pride themselves on serving their country, not the party. Now, everyone is expected to take sides. Churches and the military are purportedly in favor of Republican values. Bush has proved that in order to succeed in this country, loyalty to party is more important than loyalty to country. Case in point, one of the first people that the Republicans attacked and weakened, were civil servants because they believed they voted Democratically. Now only Librarians and surviving civil servants seem to really understand the difference between country and party loyalty and are capable of making objective decisions. (Major generalization, but it drives the point across.)

So, in the absence of a common goal, everyone is resorting to alliances to try to get an edge, since it's only those who have access to that edge that really succeed. Just ask Dick Cheney.

Affirmative Action at least leaves a paper trail. It is in the open and you can monitor it, weigh it, measure it. Cronyism, on the other hand, thrives in the darkness. It is a monster, that if we really understood the extent of its girth, would drive fear into the hearts of those who have benefited from it, because they know that AA is a drop in the bucket as far as a remedy goes.

[bryant69]

22. Thank you for the lecture

Is this all hypothetical? Or is there a real person at the center of this issue?

Also being on the other side of the fence does not make one a racist. Check out the article at Salon today on how black churches are participating in the fight against homosexuality.

Bryant

[The Backlash Cometh]

23. Sorry Bryant, please re-read my post.

It wasn't meant to be a lecture. You said some words that triggered some thoughts, and I just got ahead of myself. Never did answer your question the first time I posted and it came across as a lecture. My response wasn't meant to be directed to you. I was just thinking out loud. My mistake.

As for the homosexuality and black community, I need to read the article before responding, and I have to run some errands. I'll try again in the afternoon.

Thanks for giving me some things to think about.

[The Backlash Cometh]

43. I read the salon article.

Some thoughts. The writer started out with two premises, and I don't think they're mutually inclusive. First she started to drop statistics to show the predominant number of black Americans are religious, and then she went about stating the views of a particularly rabid conservative black group. I don't think these two things are mutually inclusive, but I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and for the sake of debate, I'll accept that there is intense bigotry against homosexuals in the black community.

First thought, wouldn't surprise me in the least to find that within the black community there might be a strict moral code. I mean, really, up to the last century, these people were getting lynched just for smiling at the white women. So finding a self-imposed, strict code wouldn't surprise me in the least. I would say that it's a good thing to discover this particular prejudice, and to be aware of it. Time, hopefully, will help turn it around. Until that happens, I think this would be a good time to open discussion to find common ground between black Americans and homosexuals, because they both have a common problem: The Republicans love to use them to drum up votes and really couldn't give a damn about the things that are important to them.

[seabeyond]

2. and wouldnt that be an "ist" in itself?

[QuestionAll...]

3. dress up as an 'uppity' black woman if you are doing the interviewing.

and talk down to them like you are a white neocon silver spooner.

and watch.

[BuyingThyme]

4. You could ask 'em if they'd mind keeping an eye on the ****s.

[The Backlash Cometh]

11. I don't have any connection to the company,

however, I'm not naive to believe this is a unique situation. I'm just wondering if the time has come to make sure that human service individuals really are committed to the kinds of things that a corporation is suppose to be supporting.

[BlooInBloo]

5. Sure. I'll tell ya.

[MercutioATC]

6. One of those pre-employment psych tests must measure racist tendencies.

[The Backlash Cometh]

12. You would think.

[Nikia]

7. If possible, have the person interviewed by people of different races/ethnicities

If race/ethnicity isn't obvious, be sure that the interviewer includes some reference to it early in the interview.
Although some people might not click right away regardless of race, this might give you some clues.
If you cannot include all the groups that the person is likely to encounter and possibly be prejudice against, be sure to have the interviewer mention those groups and look for reaction. For example, I have been interviewed at food processing companies that made multiple references to Hmong workers or Spanish speaking workers. I am sure that part of the reason was making sure that I (or any other candidate) didn't have any problems working with Hmong or Spanish speaking people.

[happyslug]

8. Sorry I would take an opposite approach.

In any job interview the Candidate is putting his best foot forward and in today's society that implies NOT to be Racist, Sexist or have any other prejudice. If such a person has such a prejudice he or she will keep it to themselves even if interviewed by someone who they are prejudice against.

The better approach is during the 90 day probation period (Probation periods are 90 days for the hiring company is NOT charged for any unemployment paid out if the employee only works for them less than 90 days). The person should be taken out to lunch and other office activities and see how he or she interacts with people of different races. A trickily way is to have someone like the person make a sexist or racist comment and see how the person reacts, mere agreement to the racist/sexist is meaningless, but if it is expanded on you have problems (Agreement may be his or her way to get out of an uncomfortable situation without offending anyone, thus you need more than "agreement").

The biggest problem is you are often force to hire people who you would NOT normally do lack of other candidates. Thus you might have to work around someone's prejudice or fears (and some people can have fears of others which is why they are prejudice). Thus you may have to take on someone who is prejudice. In that case you just have to work around him or her and his or hers Prejudice.

My Father had a Saying "As a good Christian I only believe only one man was ever perfect, and we nailed him to a Cross". The point was and is we all have problems and prejudices, some are legal (i.e. I am prejudice against jumping out of perfectly good airplanes) other are illegal. You sometime have to work around these problems and prejudice in ANY work environment. The best way to do so is to recognize the problem or prejudice and deal with it. If the problem is someone's racial or Sex Prejudice make sure that person is NEVER put in a place where it can come into play. You can tell the person NOT to be so prejudice, but often the only way to handle the situation is to work around the prejudice (for example never leave someone prejudice against women interview a woman for a job).

Thus if you detect a prejudice or other problem within the first 90 days of someone's employment and realize you can NOT work around that problem or prejudice, the person should be let go (And this should be true even after the 90 day probation period, take the hit on your un-employment).

On the other hand if you can work around the problem, keep the work and just work around the problem, it is easier than looking for that "perfect" Worker who does NOT exist.

[Radical Activist]

10. Bring up affirmative action

If they have any underlying racist attitudes it will come out in their opinion of that subject.

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. I just wish I had been a fly on the wall on his/her interview day.

[treestar]

15. But is everyone who is against that necessarily a racist?

Or is it in the way they put it?

[Radical Activist]

16. It is a topic

that causes people's underlying mild racism to rise to the surface. I won't claim that every single person who opposes affirmative action is racist. But, those who do oppose it are usually rationalizing for their racism and show their unwillingness to admit the reality of racism in society that affirmative action is there to address. It often shows how clueless people are to the reality of life beyond their white suburb.

[The Backlash Cometh]

17. I think by this late date, that anybody who doesn't support AA

doesn't fully understand the reason why it is necessary or, on the opposite, understands it too well and is opposed to the challenge of power to white males that it presents.

The reality is, that their methods of deciding who goes to college or who gets promoted is only going to continue the subjective decisions that favors them.

And, one important thing to remember, is that ANYBODY in power will select someone that fits their comfort zone. Or, in other words, someone like them, or someone who will not threaten them. That means that Affirmative Action is here to stay because NOONE is above making prejudicial decisions.

[treestar]

18. But there are AA people who oppose it

Some may think it is better to just bear with residual racism until it goes away rather than have to deal with affirmative action perpetually. Maybe they are wrong, but they wouldn't be racist.

And it can create racists. White people who believe they are somehow victimized by it - again not saying they are right, but that they are people who got that impression and became racist over it when they might not have been racists otherwise.

[The Backlash Cometh]

24. I think we are in the era of alliances.

When I was young, I thought that my goal was suppose to be to bond with the community called "American." But most of the icons that the right-wingers co-opted for themselves, is what I thought America was a part of. The Harley Davidson, country-music, church, military. All of it was what I was suppose to feel a part of. But the last fifteen years changed all that. My journey is over. I no longer feel a need or desire to seek a national image. But I do understand that friendship and relationships depend on finding people with common values.

We are in a fight that will not change in our lifetime. Unless great leadership presents itself to bring this country together, and I don't see how that's going to happen, because it will require that greedy people be stopped from taking advantage of those who show some restrain for the common good.

[treestar]

29. There is very little that is common to the entire culture

But there might be a few things - we need to cultivate that - baseball is a great common denominator - those who are not inclined to extreme racism end up having to admire persons of other races - my 100 year old grandfather was always sort of racist due to the era he grew up in, it was not politically incorrect to use certain disparaging terms and the segregation was more than just race - even Protestant/Catholic were racist toward each other - but he always loved baseball and football and knew black or Hispanic players could be the best.

[The Backlash Cometh]

30. Sometimes it's hard to differentiate between racism, and just a mean-spirited

people.

I went to a private school for college. Only 2% minority. At the time, I didn't even consider myself a minority member and felt I was part of what we now know as the "white" culture. Well, let me tell you, I got to witness white on white crime. LOL! It's alive and well in sorority houses across this country. LOL! I never pledged, mind you, but being an independent made me neutral territory and the girls would come running to tell me their misfortunes at the hands of their "sisters." I just can't believe how mean some people can be to their own kind. Maybe I even wondered back then, if minorities realized that some of the things they were subjected to, were just an outcrop of a mean-spirited battle for power.

[treestar]

44. True, there are always people who are just plain rotten

And they come in all races, creeds, etc., IMO, but also are fortunately a minority.

[lumberjack_jeff]

27. In my experience, there are few topics which promote more all-encompassing generalities

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2986479&mesg_id=2987056

Without putting too fine of a point on it, am I a racist?

When it comes to the idea that my kids should be bypassed for educational opportunities in favor of an equally-qualified member of a minority group, I question the view that this is a liberal concept.

When the only reliable mechanism to verify compliance with the policy is a count of raw numbers, the defense that this isn't a quota system is hard to support.

When a company HR director says that unqualified minorities are being hired and that whites are being fired to make room for them, there's an alternative explanation to the one provided by the OP.

[The Backlash Cometh]

31. Do you realize that in schools that support AA, rural white students

are a beneficiary? Schools that support AA, support diversity. That means that they are actually looking for rural white students.

I think that's what I find so difficult with this subject is that white Americans don't really realize that AA is NOT an exclusive minority entitlement program. And you all have many more. For example, we all know that legacies are a privilege that whites are in a better position to take advantage of because their parents and grandparents have a higher probability of attending college. And, there is a way around AA, altogether. According to statistics, minority groups don't usually apply to college for early admission. So, you can do as my smart Democratic friend did and force her bright, but academically challenged son to apply, early enrollment. He got in despite his grades, but it could also have been because he was a double legacy and a hardship case. Of course, the kid doesn't see any of this as an advantage. He came back from college denouncing Affirmative Action and said he was a libertarian because he didn't want anybody telling him what to do.

[lumberjack_jeff]

39. Legacy admissions suck too.

Diversity is a good thing. Universities which find themselves disproportionately represented by one "type" of student can and should do outreach.

Outreach in the name of diversity is an an entirely different animal than AA.

[The Backlash Cometh]

40. I think you're mincing words so you don't have to step on the edges

of your principles. AA and Outreach attempt to achieve the same thing.

And if AA bothers you, imagine how we minorities feel about the good ole boy networks that work under the radar. You wonder where our outrage comes from? The only difference today, is that now everybody has a chance of getting screwed in America. And, unfortunately, that's why nobody trusts anybody and why it will be very hard to motivate this country to work together with anything less than a Pearl Harbor.

You do away with the behind the scene networks that exist in this capitalist country, and you no longer have a reason for Affirmative Action.

[lumberjack_jeff]

41. No, it's not.

AA uses a calculator and a grayscale card to determine if the law is being upheld.

Diversity looks at the whole of the university population and subjectively decides if individual applicants are a good fit.

Does the college dean worry that they'll be sued if a spreadsheet indicates that they don't have enough artists? Rural kids? People with developmental disabilities? Political activists?

No, they don't. Dr King's dream is not yet realized. People are still not judged on the content of their character.

[The Backlash Cometh]

42. If people were judged on the basis of their character, you'd have

an equal representation of cultural groups in prison, white-owned contractors would be sued more often, and our Congress would be a proper representation of the population.

But, alas, something happens along the way. What YOU see has an equitable system, is not equitable at all.

I don't think that you nor I will live to see Dr. King's dream come true, either, because it will require that everyone lose their prejudicial tendencies and their outrage. I just don't see that happening. I'm a realist.

[Radical Activist]

38. Here we go

You claim in the post you linked that institutional racism is gone. If you really believe that then you don't understand how prevelant racism is in our society today, which is why you don't understand the need for affirmative action.

Why should so many kids be bypassed for getting a decent ecucation and the chance at a decent job because of their race and background? Yes, that still happens to non-white people. Are you willing to do nothing to adress that? Do you have a better way than affirmative action?
The thing about White privelage is that you benefit from it whether you realize it or not. It can be a difficult thing to give up when one doesn't recognize its existance.

When a PR director claims that unqualified minorities are being hired while qualified whites are being fired I typically think that the company is doing a lousy job of recruiting qualified minorities, and the person is looking for scapegoats and outlets for their racist grudges.

[BlooInBloo]

14. There's nothing really practical to do with this.... White folks have had a LOT of practice....

... stifling their true feelings, until the company of like-minded zealous bigots is assured. About 50 years worth of practice, and warping the language itself to serve their needs.

They aren't so unlike the Sith, compared to the complacent "good Jedi", Sith-deniers.

:rofl:

SURELY that must win most craptacular analogy EVER.

:rofl:

[slampoet]

20. I have a Great way to test this!!!

For years a friend of mine and I play this game we call "Face-isms" (fake+racism)

What we do is we select an odd Minority that doesn't live in the area or any area that the "victim/mark" has lived in. For example the Amish if they are from California, or Hawaiians if they are from New England.

Then we make up an arbitrary but untrue stereotype about that group, like "Those Hawaiians are really loud, you don't want them as neighbors." or "Mormons are the worst drivers." or "Amish people usually smell bad."

The next step is to sit back and see who agrees with you.


When the mark answers back "Yeah, I've always heard that about them," you know that you have person who is actively into prejudice. Once they agree with your fake racism you can tell them that you just made it up. The reaction once they are caught being an asshole is absolutely precious!!! I have even had people try to find evidence online to support these obvious lies in a vain effort to save face.

A lot of people will just try to get along with you and just let the stereotype roll by. These people are either neutral, are passive, or really just don't want to f-up and cause a scene. Most of us are in this group.

The ones to hire are the ones who say, "I have never heard that about them." or they ask "Where in hell did you hear that?" Anyone brave enough to confront a biggot in a job interview is someone who you want on your team at work and probably want to hang out with in your everyday life.

The only proviso I have for this game is don't make up the stereotype that a certain group is "Cheap".
EVERY ethnic group has had to scrimp and save when they immigrated to the USA. All of us Americans are cheapskates in general, (with the possible exception of Native Americans and Appalachian people who have a reputation as generous)

[The Backlash Cometh]

25. Good game.

One caveat. I picture in my mind a submissive person, maybe a stay at home mom who is just coming out into the work force and is unsure of herself. All her life she may have gone along to get along. So, she may assume the person making the comment is a racist, and if she wants the job bad enough, she might agree because she needs the money.

[blogslut]

26. Take the person out to dinner

or lunch.

You can learn sooooooooooooo much about a person by observing how they treat "the help".

[The Backlash Cometh]

32. I think that some extra thought must be made into the interview process.

You are helping no one, if you get people in the personnel department who are turning applicants away and tell them, "We can't hire you because we have to hire a minority." And we are assuming that both applicants are equally qualified.

[blogslut]

34. okay

Sorry, I thought you were trying to determine if a particular person was a racist or not. I assumed that this person was already an employee. I suggested you take them out for a meal to see how they act with service workers.

[The Backlash Cometh]

35. Yeah, I think in this case, it would be helpful to know what someone

really thinks about important issues, and getting on a personal level may be the only way to do it.

[blogslut]

36. Does your company have an employee cafeteria?

Take the interviewee down for a cup of coffee and a doughnut. See how they treat the cashier, the folks that work the line and the bussers.

Or not. It's just an idea. :)

[The Backlash Cometh]

37. I'm not involved with the corporation at all.

I just know this person's views and what he does for a living. And, I don't think he/she is unique.

[ecstatic]

28. Not sure if it's ethical, but set the person up in a private room

Then have someone else come in and make a few casual racist statements and see if the person takes the bait? :shrug: Again, I'm not sure if this type of set up is "wrong," but I see it all the time on those expose type shows.

[The Backlash Cometh]

33. The more I think about it, the more I think this method wouldn't work.

People might assume that the interviewer is the racist, and the economy is bad enough so that even good people might have to resort to some chameleon methods.