Should people get a job on ability or because they tick a PC box?

[Big Joe]

I am a big believer that any person regardless of height weight faith colour gender sexual orientation should be given a job because they are the best person for that job. ie They have the necessary skills and abilities to do the said job to a high standard. More businesses and particularly the public sector are giving jobs to under achieving people because they tick one of the aforementioned politically correct boxes and so the said organisation can say look one of our key staff is sky blue pink with yellow dots on and during the week he is called Fred but he prefers Loretta at weekends. A few years ago I had to have my rather battered (rugby nose) remodelled. I was told the guy who did it was the best in the North and yes he was. Now I have a film star nose. He is good at what he does and all the other stuff is irrelevant because he has the requisite skills. I would of thought twice if he was only in post because he ticked a politically correct label.
I once over heard a woman who was going for a promotion talking to her friend. She blatantly said that if she didn't get the promotion she would make a claim for discrimination because she was a single parent!!!! no shame. Recent case the Metropolitan Police Officer from a visible ethnic background who was their poster girl for the 2012 Olympic Games. It turns out the said officer has made persistant claims of racism and discrimination when she has basically failed to get her own way a point that was made by the Judge at her latest tribunal when he threw out her case. Hurrah for common sense. Sadly while companies cower in fear at the power of the PC Brigade the rest of us have to put up with people being given jobs they do not have the skill sets for but do tick some PC box. Thoughts ???

[cashman]

Should always be best person for the job,Simple as. these days theres too many stupid gets that say otherwise imho.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Definitely on ability....nothing else.
No ticking of ethnic (or for that matter any other minority whether it be gender, sexual orientation)boxes just to fill quota's.

[Big Joe]

I think that would be most peoples view. Sadly like fake accident/illness claims there are always people who will play the system and sadly the system bends over backwards to support them. Sometimes I feel the system would wise up as it puts people who are genuinely being discriminated against in one form or another in the same bag as the low lifes who are just out for what they can get.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Of course there are people who play the system....and it because the system is flawed.
It is in the attempt to make everyone equal...it will never work.
There has never ever been equality, there never will be equality....and trying to manufacture equality is not the way to do it, because it is counter productive.
There are always going to be those who are cleverer, or who earn more money or who have better privileges.

It creates a simmering resentment in those who are not considered.
A bit like the giving of 25 yr olds £10,000 at the expense of taxing the elderly more to pay for it.

I think it is immoral to select a person for a position because they tick a box that will satisfy a government target unless of course their skills, experience or qualifications make them the best person for the job.

[Restless]

I have a friend that believes that if we applied for the same job and had the exact same experience and qualification that he would get the job based on the fact that he went to a Christian school (st christophers) and I went to moorhead

[hilleluk]

It should always be about ability to do the job...If you have a good personality it's a bonus

[Less]

Sometimes the best person for the job isn't the most qualified.
For example, someone that didn't do well at school may well be the best shelf filler a supermarket could ever need, happy that they are employed, content to do the job for life with no wishes to move on. Once trained a reliable employee.
However life and the dole will push a far more qualified person to take that job as a stop gap until they can get a decent interview for a job they are capable of doing. Is this fair? They will no doubt shine at the shelf filler interview and if taken on deprive the 'real shelf filler' from their job of a life time, sometimes just taking any job even if temporary is the wrong thing to do and should not be encouraged.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Less I can see your logic, but I am not sure if I agree with it.
It is sometimes easier to,get a job when you are in a job....and employers are wary of people who have gaps in their employment history.
Yes, sometime you CAN be over qualified for a job, but that does not mean that you should not be doing it.
It is better to be in a job you are 'overqualified' for than to be selected purely because you tick some minority box, but do not really have the skills that the job requires.

[monkey hanger]

[QUOTE=Margaret Pilkington;1213548
Yes, sometime you CAN be over qualified for a job, but that does not mean that you should not be doing it.

thats ok in theory but an employee might think you are only applying for the job till something better turns up which could be sooner than later and the application process starts all over again. found the same thing years ago when employing bus drivers and conductors.

[Margaret Pilkington]

If an employer needs a worker.....and a willing, well qualified worker presents themselves, then why wouldn't they employ them?
Does it really matter that someone has better qualifications than the job asks for?
I guess it depends on how urgent the need for a worker really is.
I know a man who was a manager of a factory....he was made redundant when the factory went down the gurgler.
This man was very well qualified for a managerial post....but he took a job as a street cleaner.
He does the best job of any street cleaner we have had in our local area.
He is good at the job, very conscientious and had the council applied your rules, then we would be without someone to keep our streets clean.

[monkey hanger]

thats one you know margaret and i imagine there are others too. was sick of people who started one week and left the next because something more in their line popped up and it was not the odd ones either.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Employers will always want someone who is going to stay, but the truth is they do not do much(and I know this is a huge generalisation here) to retain valuable staff.
Those who do a good job and go the extra mile.
A good employer will ensure that the recruitment process is suitable to detect those who really are not going to be an asset to the company.
I was involved in recruitment and selection during my working life and so I know how valuable a good process is.
There are always going to be those who find that either their circumstances have changed, or the job is not what they thought it would be...but I still think that if there is a job, and you want to be in work, then you should take it...Gaps on a CV make employers think you are workshy.

[Mark2009]

If a person WANTS to work and they are willing to take any job , then I admire them for that whether they are over qualified or not. Working and not relying on the state for support gives some people a lot of satisfaction and self worth. In my parents and grand parents era, it was whether or not you were working that was important to them and gave them pride.
Mark

[Margaret Pilkington]

Working doesn't just put food on the table and pay th bills.
It is an important social action...It means that you polish your interpersonal skills, gain experience of life and gives your self esteem a boost.
No matter how lowly or menial the job...It is worth doing to stay in the job market.