Please don't take this the wrong way, I not a misogynist nor racist.
I understand that it gets very white, very male, and very American at the top, but forcing incompetent individuals of certain minorities to managerial or executive levels is not only insulting to such minorities but also counterproductive.
Seems outright illegal to move any person up or down the rank list based on their races,,,,but EM does this systematically.
Explain why it is not illegal.
HR runs an analysis of minority distribution on the rank list and moves some upwards to achieve a “quota”.
HR always says this is required.
Not sure if just EM policy but HR implies that it is required by law.
It would be really nice if someone explained that law requirement.
@5jen. To ensure the optics show they are having a good career with advancement and not just bottom of the barrel tokens at low levels and at risk of being let go. Sorry, it's not only about the employment quotas.
Please explain how US Federal laws can require EM HR to move minorities up the rank list above their coworkers that outperformed them.
Some people posting here as woke wannabes should first read what Xendi wrote: the only way to end discrimination is to discriminate. Check it out please, this idea is central to “antirasism”. No fig leaf, no excuse, no discussion, straight to the facts. When this is stated publicly, with no shame or subterfuge, why do we even need to argue about this topic?
We are calling Americans that are non-white coloreds now? Wow. What they say about Exxon is true I guess. I can see why HR and management has to override you in assessments. Scary to think you have the power to shape a minority’s career, I think we all know how that will turn out based on all these posts.
Moving a person more than 20 points up the rank list after ranking discussions finalized only because of their race is by definition pure discrimination.
Somehow EM thinks this is legal.
Some have stated that this is forced by federal and state laws.
Please please please explain to me the legal requirements to move a person on the rank list based on their race.
I kinda agree with OP. Not all coloreds can handle the jobs they're put in. No point forcing it.
ID: @4rhk+1izgQ2f1, you are spot on, equal opportunity is painful for some, lol.
Hilarious how the descendants of the good ol boys that invented the biased system are now crying foul because the system is no longer working 100% in their favor.
"That's biased!... why don't I get to cut the line like my daddy did and my daddy's daddy did!? wah...wah...wah!"
Sounds about white.
@3fzi+1izgQ2f1, congrats to the leadership for stepping in. You may not be qualified to judge the performance of a minority compared to an overwhelming majority of non-minorities.
I had a minority employee working for me that was ranked in middle of all my non minority employees. This was agreed by all in the ranking meeting.
When communication time came around, I was shocked to see that the person in the middle was now by far the top ranked.
Contacted HR and was verbally told this was an adjustment based on race.
That is systematic racism.
When I communicated the ranking to the employee, it was extremely awkward because the performance was not even near that level and that employee actually believed that the rank was earned.
I also felt really bad communicating the rankings to the employees ranked below that person when I knew for a fact they had outperformed that person and had been ranked above that person in the rank meeting but HR had unethically moved them down because they were not a minority.
Ranking system in EM devoid of ethics and filled with racism. These two traits filtered out of every other part of our business yet reinforced in ranking.
So what you’re saying is that white males are inherently better and the only way for others to get in is to drop the performance expectation? So you found a lousy leader that is in one of the underrepresented groups…what’s the explanation for all the bad white ones? Last I checked our white male leaders were running sh-t to the ground all on their own. While it isn’t the perfect solution, the problem with not setting targets, is that we default to an unconscious bias of 99% old white men. Spare me the “they took our jobs” victim card and look around.
This is generally true where I work. The post about HR having percentage guidelines is true from what I’ve heard. I’ve also heard of people getting promoted specifically because the are a minority or woman.
It is what it is. I’ve realized that I need to learn to play the game or leave.
Ha ha. Even the layoff is practicing woke censorship
Correlation vs causation. Lots of people are being shoved into roles they should not be in and making things worse, regardless of race. Turn off Fox
Well they have not diversified the alma mater base, the ideas are either Aggies or Longhorns with a few LSU......try to get a job, conversation or idea off the ground if you are not one of them, you won't. Let's not even talk about the questions you get around what 'church' you go to...... yet another lack of diversity & ideas.
Wow - worms are in the woodwork.
EM is one brittle chopstick based on these responses.
One thing you can't hide - being cr!ppled inside.
Go Aggies!
@1mqk - not when you have presidents of business divisions (like the old F&L) pronouncing “I’ve told my managers, don’t come to me with promotion recommendations unless your list of people includes a woman and a minority”. Never mind selecting the right person for the job, eh?
What is the mystery with the Diversity programs? The federal government and all states have mandated EEO Compliance Laws. "Diversity" is just the trendy way to ensure the Company is within those laws.
If we truly wanted the best person for the positions,there would be no grouping with weighed categories. The fact that we have different standards to meet quotas will only ensure you’ll never have a championship team…
I do find it ironic that while we preach diversity, the company has no problem highlighting and supporting individual criteria groups. If we truly embraced diversity we would not need these groups, right…
I was told by HR that targets are set for percentages of minorities in the top categories and that persons are moved upward to reach those targets. Moved upward above people that outperformed them.
Seems illegal, but at very least unethical.
i went to a refinery not too long ago and the typical obligatory safety video mentioned nothing about warning sirens, signals, phone numbers, or radio channels for emergency use. it did, however, waste most of my time reminding me that any intolerant behavior toward diversity and inclusion would NOT be tolerated. LOL. Thanks. That is of utmost critical importance to me as i prepare to enter an oil refinery, personal safety be damned.
There hardly is room for discussion on this topic. When you look among new graduates in the field of chemical engineering, petroleum engineering and geoscience, from which most of the management is drawn, you see that minorities are very few in thei ranks. So stop pretending that the “whiteness” of the management comes from some racist plot, when eligible minority representatives are so rare. Virtually any good graduate who is a minority will du d it’s way to the top, much easier than white ones, because companies are desperate to promote them.
It reminds me of an not so bright male who used to work for EM and now poses as a champion of D&I on LinkedIn, who took a look at his LI network, built normally over years, and then started to grovel when discovering that most of his contacts were white men!
For those who believe the affirmative action in COED and annual assessments is warranted and a good thing, I have an honest question: are members of the less favored classes supposed to pretend these things don’t exist? I hear you that folks shouldn’t assume members of minority groups who are promoted upwards are promoted because of these policies, but, come on, it very well could be. We are extremely open about these policies. This is a double edged sword.
I personally don’t believe these policies should, exist, and this is one of the very good reasons. It sets up the soft bigotry of low expectations.
Its pretty sad that you see a minority that gets promoted and your auto bias is that the person isnt a leader, or not competent, or not this and not that. Thats why there needs to be a better leadership path for minorities. if its up to you, everyone would look the same, act the same, and do the same, which is very unAmerican. Keep promoting people that are different XOM! Set the standard!
How much whiter and male does the company have to be for you to be happy? 150%?
Considering that white men don’t constitute more than 35% of the population on average, it would be more fair to say that they’re over-represented, but I don’t see many posts arguing to pare that back. It’s mostly the same whining about having to walk by someone who isn’t white on the way to their desk in the morning.
About 40% of the country isn’t white. If you don’t like it, move to Scandinavia. Personally, I don’t care what anyone looks like as long as the job gets done.
Hows the CEO, head of HR, and all the past people that made decisions on the current company portfolio working out for you?
divide and conquer.
Olé!
I agree with op.
I don't think thay treating women like children that deserve a trophy for participation is virtuous.
In my section we have close to 40% attrition since 2020. Failing to retain half of your people is a a very good measure of incompetence.
This is alive and well in Annandale, site has been destroyed…..our safety meetings have become very woke, so disgusting along with these D&I moments , such BS and everyone knows it…….
Can't fix racism with more racism. It should have been enough to shame and take action against racism itself.
Thomas Sowell talks in depth about institutional racism in the education system by supposed liberals in the name sake of diversity and equal opportunity. Look him up.
Darren must be some kind of minority. No other way he gets to the top.
Gross.
I've found that that competence is hard to measure.
But surely submitting holiday weekend posts of this kind to the layoff board is a trait of a highly competent employee.
You'll be moving on up, fer sure, opie.
During years of growth it would make sense to promote underrepresented leadership into management. Now? Why are we continuing to invest in management positions when there are fewer people to manage each year?
For every manager or executive that retires or leaves, the position should be eliminated if at all possible.
If you have to start the sentence with “I’m not racist, but…” - you’re being racist.