[enteeentee]

I hate all these oh they’re just being a woke company articles, blah, blah, they completely misunderstand the point of diversity from an HR perspective. Yes there is a good reason to promote diversity in a company that isnt necessarily an immediate make more money thing, but does contribute. Basically companies have a lot of problems with recruiting and retaining talent, having good talent will increase performance. Showing you are accepting of a diverse set of people is on some levels a recruitment marketing exercise.

The amount of money spent on diversity executives, well yeah probably a bit high, but about the amount you’d pay an HR exec at that level

As a gay man, if I have 2 similar job offers, one with a company that shows they are accepting and dont accept prejudice, and another that says nothing. Which one do you think I’ll choose?

Not just in diversity, but I’d far more prefer to work for a company that has values that align with me, eg I wouldnt want to work for a company that is involved with arms dealing, sure this will make you a lot of money for shareholders, but do you want to hand out pain, misery and death? Not all of us work for the bottom line. I recognise I am working for a business, but Id much prefer to think of my job as creating something, making things easier for people rather than just making money as a mission, that sounds like a miserable way to live.

[CapricornNoble]

> As a gay man, if I have 2 similar job offers, one with a company that shows they are accepting and dont accept prejudice, and another that says nothing. Which one do you think I’ll choose?

As a contrarian data point, as a black man, when I see a company or other organization hit all the DEI talking points about embracing minorities, etc....I throw up in my mouth a little bit and head in the opposite direction. I prefer blind meritocracies, which is what both the Army and Marine Corps used to be when I joined them. Now....even the Marine Corps is looking to staff a DEI Officer in the National Capital Region (seriously).

[paulryanrogers]

Were the army or Marines truly blind meritocracies at every level, even within the officer corps? Because that would be impressive, and a sad thing to lose for vanity metrics.

[CapricornNoble]

I was enlisted in the Army, and an officer in the Marine Corps. No organization is perfect but by-and-large, yes, I found even the officer ranks to be reasonably meritocratic. If anything the organization's biases were caused by your career background: Infantry Officers rule the Corps as a whole. Fighter pilots rule the Marine Aircraft Wings; every other professional specialty is definitely a second-class citizen.

[pauldenton]

The Marines don’t have any race problems. They treat everybody like they’re black.”- Gen Daniel “Chappie” James Jr., USAF, circa 1970.

[epups]

> As a gay man, if I have 2 similar job offers, one with a company that shows they are accepting and dont accept prejudice, and another that says nothing. Which one do you think I’ll choose?

I honestly don't know. Do you seriously think that a company that has a diversity officer "believes" anything differently than one that doesn't?

We should not confuse promoting diversity with enshrining this into bureaucracy in a very specific and, in my opinion, misguided way. There are plenty of examples of these officers making the problem worse.

[pg_1234]

I'd go with the one that hasn't lied to you yet ...

... the one that said nothing.

[projectazorian]

This isn’t wrong, but in my experience working at both types of companies, the companies that say nothing often tolerate all sorts of toxic behavior that wouldn’t be tolerated elsewhere. So, I now use explicit commitment to DEI as a filter.

[zer8k]

> As a gay man, if I have 2 similar job offers, one with a company that shows they are accepting and dont accept prejudice, and another that says nothing. Which one do you think I’ll choose?

Are you implying that companies that don't beat the pride war drum publicly are prejudiced against you? Do you extend this to other people as well? I've never been to a pride march, I post nothing about supporting this or that movement, yet I don't have prejudice against gay people. They live their lives. I live mine.

This seems like more manufactured victimhood than anything else. Given that companies are driven by profit, and companies find doing this kind of thing profitable, do you think the ones that are "out in the open" are telling the truth? How much kow-towing does a company have to do before you believe them?

> Not all of us work for the bottom line. I recognise I am working for a business, but Id much prefer to think of my job as creating something, making things easier for people rather than just making money as a mission, that sounds like a miserable way to live.

Making money is the mission. The reason a company can afford these supposed "diversity efforts" that you use to judge good from bad are because they are making money. You may be different. I, and many people like me, want to go to work and go home with the least amount of song and dance possible. I don't want to have to sit through another layer of bureaucracy, another layer of song-and-dance, just to have a job. It feels so very forced. I have no evidence it's drives out bad actors either. All it does it give people another job risk where if you don't tow the line perfectly, sing the right song, or march with everyone else you will get fired (canceled). In fact, this sounds like the exact opposite of diversity to me.

[projectazorian]

> Are you implying that companies that don't beat the pride war drum publicly are prejudiced against you?

Maybe, maybe not. But if one company explicitly says they have your back, and another doesn’t, most people will go with the one saying the right thing.

That’s no guarantee of protection either, inclusivity is superficial at a lot of companies, but there is a better chance that you will have a good experience.