[__turbobrew__]

How is rejecting a candidate soley based on race not racial discrimination?

This is illegal where I live; it is probably why companies never give interview feedback to the interviewees because they make these illegal hiring decisions behind the scenes but then say “it wasn’t a good fit”.

[greatgoat420]

So in general companies will reject people based on race an sex all the time. In fact most of the time when candidates who are not fitting their mold come up. It is super easy to avoid pushback if you plead culture fit as an issue or just judge their responses more strongly. The person who would oversee that won't know what suboptimal solution would really mean, other than unqualified. Maybe they had an unused variable. Maybe they didn't explain themselves.

[lazyasciiart]

> I pushed hard for an amazing candidate, the first to ever ace my interviews, whereas said other stakeholders wanted a certain diversity candidate

Your reading of this comment is "other stakeholders rejected an excellent candidate solely based on race". The actual information given was that the commenter really liked one candidate, and the other stakeholders preferred a different candidate who was somehow "diverse". While I think the commenter probably agrees with your interpretation, it seems equally likely to me that their candidate evaluation was bad, and that the other stakeholders did not use diversity as their sole criteria.

[xenihn]

Racial discrimination is a legal concept. There is no racial discrimination if you lack the following:

- evidence

- witnesses who are willing to testify

- legal action

Whether it actually happened or not is irrelevant.

[andrei_says_]

And everyone in the company being Caucasian and Asian doesn’t count :)

Just like the photo of the C-suite of most companies being 99% male doesn’t count as sexism.

[vharuck]

Yes, it does technically fit "racial discrimination." However, some people use that simpler term to talk about historic and current power imbalances. In the United States, there were a lot of extra barriers for non-white people. Some still exist, but there's also the self-perpetuating barriers, like how children from poor households are likely to be poor adults. So, if somebody wants to help solve "racial discrimination," being "race blind" would mean letting past wrongs stay wrong.

[ekianjo]

Where does education fit in in your assumptions ? Even poor people make it up the social ladder thru education. Most of our ancesters were farmers, and most of them very poor too.

[cma]

You have things like alumni admissions preference at schools that didn't allow black people within just a couple alumni generations.

[lazyasciiart]

Or public school districts neatly drawn to separate rich white areas from poor black areas.

[HarryHirsch]

In the United States, there were a lot of extra barriers for non-white people

Join us in Alabama! Here, they put up barriers for everyone that wasn't a large landowner or industrialist. This set back descendants of black slaves, but descendants of white sharecroppers were equally caught up in the net. Arguably, the poor whites were worse off - every black guy realized they were being oppressed, but a good number poor whites had the wool drawn over their eyes.