Difference between White and Irish

BlitzKrieg

This is something small but has me scratching my head. I was filling an application to work for VUE in england and in the Ethni origin section it had:


White {}
Irish {}


question: Whats the difference...And It is not religion because thats the next section. And does that mean if we are not technicaly White then are we excluded from all the hate the other ethnic groups have towards white people due to paste abuse and exploition...

Victor

It's an equality legislation thing. Because there has been specific active (no Irish, blacks or dogs) discrimination (as opposed to passive discrimination against “foreigners” in general) against Irish people in the UK, their equality authority keeps track of the number of job applications and job placements for Irish (or black or Asian, African, etc.) people. If there is a specific discrepancy that can't be justified, then action can be taken by the equality authority. As best I know it is a matter of how you define yourself, not some outside judge.

Ivan

So basically mark Irish and its possible they may hire you purely on the grounds that they need to fill their quota of Irish people?

ixoy

If I remember rightly, there can also be a similiar thing for sexuality to ensure that your employer doesn't discriminate you if you're gay.

Syth

It's funny that they have to ask about ethic origin (or sexuality) as I had heard that to be a true 'equal opertunities' employer they couldn't ask. (Yonks ago) someone was giving me the example of a woman going for an interview, and if they asked her if she was married, she could ask them did it matter, and why did they need to know. The logic behind it is that if the interview board knew of her marital status they might hold it against her.

Seems to have changed.

Victor

Originally posted by Syth
It's funny that they have to ask about ethic origin (or sexuality) as I had heard that to be a true 'equal opertunities' employer they couldn't ask.

The idea is to have two separate questionaires, with the equality one being anonymous and processed separately.

ixoy

Originally posted by Syth
Seems to have changed.

You reckon? They've just announced that 40% of teachers must be women. That means discriminatory tactics will have to come into play. That smacks of being unfair to me.

_blank_

The OP seems to think that all Irish people are white?

And this presumption present throughout this whole thread.

It is wrong, and highly indicitive of the mindset of the posters so far - a mild form of Racism.

Can no non-whites be Irish?

ixoy

Good point Sean! Phil Lynott and Samantha Mumba might raise an eyebrow at that post. I think in the new multi-cultural Ireland, it's a mindset that white = Irish is something we can't afford.

Syth

I was thinking about the black/irish thing aswell. Just check both boxes then you're proably guaranteed to get a job. Say you're gay, in a wheelchair, from a disadvantaged area, black irish, jewish... anything else you can think of...

You reckon? They've just announced that 40% of teachers must be women. That means discriminatory tactics will have to come into play. That smacks of being unfair to me.

Did the same with civil servants didn't they. If they were to bring in 40% minimum male for nurses and primary teachers, then they'd quickly have a bit of a crisis.

I don't like the people who think that just because there isn't a 50/50 gender divide that there must be inherent sexism. Men and Women have inbuild (and different) natural abilities. Every should be allowed to apply for the majority of jobs, but there are explanations for gender inbalance aside from sexism.

dr_manhattan

"Phil Lynott and Samantha Mumba might raise an eyebrow at that post."

Well, Samantha might, but I'm afraid Phil Lynott is actually dead, ixoy. He died ages ago. If this is news to you can pay your respects at the annual 'vibe' for him.

;-) couldn't resist that one.

Me got not much to say about this post: i find the concept of filling these forms out kind of freaky, but there again the whole concept of affirmative action in the states can be confusing too - there's a lot of to-ing and fro-ing on the issue of manipulating figures with the goal of equality, but because it's all about math, I find it confusing ;-)

That's my bimbo-esque 2 cents anyways

Walter Ego

Sammy Davis Jnr. is on record as saying that part of his sucess was that he was "a one eyed black Irish Jew" and "everybody was afraid not to hire me". Gotta love that guy.

McGinty

If true equality was practised, potential candidates would only be asked to fill in their contact details, education and work experience on an applicaton form, and maybe interests and references.

simu

If they were to bring in 40% minimum male for nurses and primary teachers, then they'd quickly have a bit of a crisis.

They should, in fact. It would make sense if they are doing that quota thing at all. If more women are going for "non-traditional" types of jobs, they need to attract men to the ones women are leaving and it would also balance things out more quickly.

Victor

Originally posted by ixoy
They've just announced that 40% of teachers must be women.

Who are "they". Any links?

simu

Originally posted by Victor
Who are "they". Any links?

Yeah, especailly given that the majority of teachers are women in most countries.

magpie

I remember going for an interview for a Council job in England a few years ago, and having to fill in one of these forms. I remember being irked that there were loads of subdivisions of Black (African, Carribean etc) Asian (Pakistani, Indian etc) SE Asian et al, but one category marked "White" with no subdivisions, so I'm glad to see "Irish" has been added...

Unfortunately being white and male means you are a low employment priority owing to your direct responsibility (using the same logic as original sin presumably) for slavery, patriarchal systems, 19th Colonial Expansion, the atom bomb and just about everything else.

White men hang your heads in shame... we are scum! Now I need to figure out a way to stop that black lesbian in a wheelchair from stealing my job....

BlitzKrieg

i apoligize for my original post. I was being a bit stupid ignoring the presence of black irish people. again i apoligize.

rcunning03

I think in the new multi-cultural Ireland

Let's not go mad, there may be a few people of different origins emigrating to the country, but most of them wouldn't be Irish due to the fact of them being Nationals of other countries, their children will be Irish, so in a generation or two we will be multi-culutural but not at the moment.

kiffer

I have been told:
"All you white people are the same, you're doing this because I'm Black, You're all racist!"

on one occation I said "I'm not white, I'm Irish."

which might not have been the smartest thing to say ...

martarg

Perhaps this is not much to do with the European scope of the thread, but I have just been reminded of a very interesting book by Noel Ignatiev, How the Irish Became White, which explains how Irish immigrants in America evolved from being a marginalised minority in conflict with the black population, to assimilation into the white dominant class....

Apart from that, ethnic self-identification is quite revealing in Spaniards living in the US. Since there is no specific category, we need to define ourselves as either White European or Latino. Certainly if you speak Spanish you are mostly regarded as a Latino by the English-speaking population, but it is interesting how many Spaniards will refuse to become identified with the South-American immigrant population and prefer to regard themselves as white Europeans....

seamus

Originally posted by simu
They should, in fact. It would make sense if they are doing that quota thing at all. If more women are going for "non-traditional" types of jobs, they need to attract men to the ones women are leaving and it would also balance things out more quickly.

Whoah, missed this one.

Having a quota is just a stealth discrimination, carefully disguised as political correctness. Why shouldn't employers be allowed take the best person for the job, as opposed to filling a quota?

What if a woman applied for a job, and was told, "Sorry, men only, we can't take any more women"? There'd be uproar.

I'm sorry, but employers should be allowed hire who they like (so long as their reasons are honourable). Although, as you say, some women and some men would be moving away from non-traditional jobs, on the whole, the churn would be minimal, and would balance out eachother. The fact of the matter being that largely, men will still do men jobs, and women will still do women jobs. That is, you will still have a majority of men in the construction and engineering industries for example, and a majority of women in the care and hospitality industries, for example.

While some jobs, such as Doctors and Nurses have seen massive changes in the sex of employees, worrying about there being a drought of employees because one sex is changing jobs sounds a bit silly IMO.

(Very, very off topic)

leeroybrown

I'm definitely in agreement with Seamus on this. Setting quota's is discrimination.

Equality is good. I like being able to turn up for an interview knowing I'm on an equal footing and that I'll be judged on my skills, experience, etc. Trying to improve diversity (balance) in an employment sector by enforcing discriminatory quota's is not only illegal but ultimately will engender tension in the work place.

I work in a multi-cultural environment and a lot of emphasis is placed on equality and avoiding any discrimination and _never_ on any form of quota's or biased recruiting/promotion.

Victor

Originally posted by leeroybrown
I'm definitely in agreement with Seamus on this. Setting quota's is discrimination.

So 50% Catholic recruits in the PSNI is discruimination? It's not discrimination if it sets out to recticfy past discrimination.

Also about taking the most qualified person, if you take someone who is overqualified will just leave when they find something better. Sometimes the best person, isn't the best person for the job.

seamus

Originally posted by Victor
So 50% Catholic recruits in the PSNI is discruimination? It's not discrimination if it sets out to recticfy past discrimination.

Is that not just a guideline - a figure to aim for? If a protestant person gets refused a position in the PSNI because they're not Cathloic, then yes it is discrimination IMO. Religion should have no bearing on anybody's eligibility for a job...but we won't go down that thread

Also about taking the most qualified person, if you take someone who is overqualified will just leave when they find something better. Sometimes the best person, isn't the best person for the job.

You know better than to try and put a dictionary meaning to an subjective phrase.

"Best for the job" depends on what the interviewer is looking for. If he needs someone who's good at the job AND will say there for a while, then the person who fills both of these criteria is the "best man for the job".