A discussion on gender quotas - how do they work. Someone please explain it to me.

who are these companies forced to hire 40% women?

I am not sure there are any official gender quotas for companies in place yet so some of your questions are simply theoretical

But in the example you give, if they had to have at least 40% women then that's what they have to have or presumably they would be subject to sanction

they do not however have to hire women who do not meet the requirements

I would think it likely that the quota would apply to all staff not just a percentage of job vacancies

Crock Rock wrote: »

into doing so.

I believe there was talk of forcing political parties to implement a gender quota for D reann.

quotas were implemented for candidates that parties ran

but there is no quota in the Dail

I believe that in private companies the quotas are commitments they make? I honestly have no idea if a private company could get fined from an official body over not fulfilling quotas.

Anyway, this also works the other way around and there are female-dominated fields like childcare that try and get male staff on board.

I think the idea of a commitment to certain quotas is certainly a good thing but the way it's done doesn't do anyone any favours and creates a rift between men and women.
And in the final stages of recruitment it often isn't solely about your qualifications anymore but how well you'd fit into the existing team and your attitude towards the job, co-workers and the field.

The mistake you’ve made OP is assuming that there are just two genders. There are in fact loads. Facebook recognises over 50 genders - https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/02/heres-a-list-of-58-gender-options-for-facebook-users/

How are you going to mange gender representation / quotas now?

Crock Rock wrote: »

Can someone please explain the logic behind these, maybe I'm missing something here. Am I missing a trick?

Say there are 10 jobs going in a certain sector.

There are 500 CVs submitted for these lucrative jobs.

The company is being forced to implement a minimum of 40% recruitment for women.

The jobs are gradually filled and the first 6 candidates to be selected are men with PhDs in the field in question, with 3-5 years of middle management in the area with more years on top of that as a junior worker.

There are 4 jobs remaining to be filled.

The company is sifting through CVs and sorting them based on qualifications and suitability for the role.

The 4 most qualified candidates chosen are 3 women and 1 man.

However, by hiring the 3 women and 1 man, they will only have 30% female candidates.

How is this dilemma solved?

Do they have to pass over the more qualified man to hire a less qualified woman to satisfy the 40% female employment ratio? I'm confused.

Do these gender quotas work the other way too? Would a company get a slap on the knuckles if they had 90% women and 10% men?

Personally I am against gender quotas.

Actually there is a youtuber True Geordie who used to be a deep sea diver doing civil engineering etc who told this story on his podcast. He was working with a guy who used to be a navy diver. His job was to pass or fail people for the royal marines.

He was told by 'higher ups' that a woman was going to be sent to him and he was NOT by any means to let her pass. He was told men wouldn't want to join and it would make it less elite a position if a woman could do it.

He didn't personally agree but he had to do it. When this woman turned up she was like this ripped triathalete. But he just beasted her.

Still not sure if the story is true. But i am sure things like that go on.

If women are in certain jobs guys don't want to do them anymore and they lose their prestige.

So while i am AGAINST gender quotas for women etc. I would like honest discussion about the topic and full disclosure from the industries Army etc.

They can hire who they like. But they must be honest if they are not hiring women etc so people don't waste their time.

If 'higher ups' truly don't want women in an industry for whatever reason they should have the balls to be open about it.

They have the right to discriminate its their organization. Just be honest.

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Personally I am against gender quotas.

Actually there is a youtuber True Geordie who used to be a deep sea diver doing civil engineering etc who told this story on his podcast. He was working with a guy who used to be a navy diver. His job was to pass or fail people for the royal marines.

He was told by 'higher ups' that a woman was going to be sent to him and he was NOT by any means to let her pass. He was told men wouldn't want to join and it would make it less elite a position if a woman could do it.

He didn't personally agree but he had to do it. When this woman turned up she was like this ripped triathalete. But he just beasted her.

Still not sure if the story is true. But i am sure things like that go on.

If women are in certain jobs guys don't want to do them anymore and they lose their prestige.

So while i am AGAINST gender quotas for women etc. I would like honest discussion about the topic and full disclosure from the industries Army etc.

They can hire who they like. But they must be honest if they are not hiring women etc so people don't waste their time.

If 'higher ups' truly don't want women in an industry for whatever reason they should have the balls to be open about it.

They have the right to discriminate its their organization. Just be honest.

The royal marines only started accepting female candidates this year.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

The royal marines only started accepting female candidates this year.

This is the video. 41.40 This is the story i am not making up.

It was to become a navy diver.



I believe him.

It was to be royal navy diver.

its a true story.

I believe the story 100% True Geordies audience is almost all guys he has nothing to gain by telling it.

I 100% believe its true.

HappyAsLarE wrote: »

As an Engineering manager I have gotten remarks about not hiring women. Women in Engineering are unusual. The percentage of applicants that are female is always less than 5%.

So statistically if you are hiring 20 engineers the likelihood is that 1 will be female... if that happened people could be up in arms...

You could though due to ‘gender pressure’ actively discriminate against a well qualified, deserving male candidate...

Crock Rock wrote: »

Again, that would fly in the face of the "best person for the job" mantra.

Meeting the minimum requirements is one thing, but foregoing a more qualified candidate to satisfy a gender quota is a different kettle of fish altogether.

an imagined gender quota which you have pretended to exist

is_that_so wrote: »

I was on engineering course where there were 4 women out of 80, not an uncommon scenario. The only area where there might be a better representation is in computer engineering courses but even there if you find beyond 30% you are doing well.

Shrug.

Men are usually better at the spacial awareness thing and maths.

My spatial awareness and geographical awareness is appalling. Like really really bad. People don't get it. I have no internal map or GPS.

I think that is a female thing.

HappyAsLarE wrote: »

It is refreshing to hear a reasonable woman stating such differences between genders in a “so what” way.

When quizzed by a HR female manager about the under representation of women in my department I replied “engineers are odd cookies why would you want to be one”.

I truly believe humility and self deprecation to be a virtue.

In an age of narcissism laced with an infantile attitude, those vital virtues are scarce!

Gender Quotas exists to benefit one gender, that is how it works, that one gender gets to choose where to get quotas implemented, because, you know, they couldn't be getting their hands dirty or hair wet!!!