OT: meritocracy vs quotas
Papi_Chulo
Miami, FL (or the nearest big-booty club)
Navy, Marines May Reinstate Promotion Board Photos After Removal Impacted Diversity
The Navy and Marine Corps could reinstate service photos in promotion and selection boards after the removal of photos adversely impacted diversity goals — the opposite of the Defense Department’s intent when it barred the use of photos in promotion boards last year.
In July 2020, then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper issued several changes aimed at improving diversity and inclusion, including directing all military branches to remove photographs from consideration by promotion boards and selection processes to “ensure equal opportunity for all.”
Diversity of enlisted leaders and officers dropped after the removal of photos, Navy Vice Adm. John Nowell Jr. said Tuesday at the Navy League’s 2021 Sea-Air-Space Exposition.
“I think we should consider reinstating photos in selection boards,” Nowell said during a panel discussion on diversity, adding that promotion board data from the last five years clearly showed “as you look at diversity, it went down with photos removed.”
https://coffeeordie.com/military-promoti…
The Navy and Marine Corps could reinstate service photos in promotion and selection boards after the removal of photos adversely impacted diversity goals — the opposite of the Defense Department’s intent when it barred the use of photos in promotion boards last year.
In July 2020, then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper issued several changes aimed at improving diversity and inclusion, including directing all military branches to remove photographs from consideration by promotion boards and selection processes to “ensure equal opportunity for all.”
Diversity of enlisted leaders and officers dropped after the removal of photos, Navy Vice Adm. John Nowell Jr. said Tuesday at the Navy League’s 2021 Sea-Air-Space Exposition.
“I think we should consider reinstating photos in selection boards,” Nowell said during a panel discussion on diversity, adding that promotion board data from the last five years clearly showed “as you look at diversity, it went down with photos removed.”
https://coffeeordie.com/military-promoti…
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
30 comments
Lastly, photo requirement is knee jerk asinine. By the time officers get to be a certain grade (O6 and above- Captain USN, Colonel USA/ USAF/ USMC), the promotion board pretty much knows who's who among the spectrum of promotion candidates, photo or not.
The existing state of affairs, especially regarding social or political issues, is hard to overcome without being perceived, by the ruling white men leadership, as a “loss” of some kind.
In the existing system, a white men patriarchal culture, the assumption is that the playing field is already level and the results already fair.
It’s a self-serving belief that absolves white men of any and all responsibility while shoring up their leadership’s existing power.
Apart from the fact that that is demonstrably untrue, history has proved, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the white men, decision-makers aren’t necessarily the best guys for the job.
Just think about it for a moment; the things that ensure success, in the existing white dominated, world are as much about good education, economic independence, connections and professional access, something that a lot of qualified people who aren’t white men simply have less opportunity to obtain.
This Lie of Meritocracy means that, “all things being equal”, a predominantly male leadership regime will tend to remain.
I stand by my stated preference for meritocracy, not diversity quotas being the rule for military promotions.
Agee 100%. In fact, merit should be the only criterion for any promotion, military or otherwise.
The ostensible purpose of the photos was to ensure the candidate knew how to wear a uniform (you might be surprised how many people actually in the military don’t), and had an acceptable level of military bearing and appearance. It was assumed boards were using the photos to ID and discriminate against minorities. The results of eliminating the photo requirement proves the opposite.
The vast majority of HR departments in corporate America/UK/Canada are run by women. The field is something like 90-95% women. Since 2020, many companies are now openly stating "We are only hiring diverse candidates at this time." In other words, no men and no whites need even apply. While this thread is about the military where there are still a lot of white males, that is obviously changing drastically right now.
Your statement about "the existing system, a white men patriarchal culture" is simply not true. It's not 1955 anymore. This appears to be a very standard leftist technique...to paint the world like it was in earlier eras (in many cases, decades ago) and use it to justify hyper-progressive policies in the present as though 1950s/1960s style oppression is still prevalent today.
America’s institutions, the government, education, and culture, all contribute or reinforce, to this day, the oppression of marginalized social groups of poor people of color while protecting dominant social groups of mainly rich white elites and their allies.
The military is just another of the United States of America’s institutions that shows the historical patterns of this system of oppression that is prevalent today.
Have things not evolved since 1776? Is a country that twice elected a black President and currently has a sitting black(ish) female Vice-President emblematic of racism that "can undeniably be seen today?"
What of a corporate culture that in the past two years has given millions to BLM? That is openly emphasizing and prioritizing the hiring of minorities and women?
^America’s institutions, the government, education, and culture, all contribute or reinforce, to this day, the oppression of marginalized social groups of poor people of color while protecting dominant social groups of mainly rich white elites and their allies.
When you talk of institutions, do you claim that the America post Civil Rights Act is not dramatically different than the America of the colonial era? Again, this is using a decades-old mindset that does not reflect modern-day reality where minorities are given every chance to succeed.
And it's not white elites vs. minorities. It's the global elites vs. everyone else (regardless of race). Race is being used by the global elites to divide and distract while they plunder ever more wealth, scheme up digital surveillance plans under the guise of Covid, concoct insane climate control regulations, and chip away at more and more individual freedoms. The social justice movements are distraction techniques. Turn women against men. Turn blacks against whites. Old Marxist techniques. To have everyone yell at each other about being oppressed and not notice while the globalists discuss their open borders plans over poached salmon at the latest "global conference" in Davos.
“You are not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality.
Wrong is wrong, no matter when, where or who does it or says it."
The CFO and several top level executives (all white males) made a presentation to the class and during the discussion a female POC pointed out that there were very few women or POC represented at the management level of the company.
I thought the response was quite interesting. The CFO said they heavily recruit blacks at all the Ivy’s and run full page ads in the Wall Street Journal and NY Times trying to recruit women and POC and they get zero qualified applicants. All the top level students from Harvard, Yale, Princeton want to work in New York or the east coast - they don’t want to live in the Midwest if it’s not a large urban area.
Dig a little deeper. There’s always more to the story than white corporate America simply may be all racists.
Problem found. Or one of them. How many grads are out there from non-Ivy League schools? Motorhead has a point. Perception issues are not all about race.
The ironic thing is the company was acquired by company ranked in the top 50 of fortune company with HQ in Boston about 2 years later so one of the Ivy students who failed to apply could have been working
in the east coast
Back in those days there was never any training specifically geared toward diversity or inclusion. Gays weren't allowed, period. As far as race discrimination, the military was the one place where it didn't seem to exist. Everyone knew that accepting others based on their ability and dedication to the mission could one day make the difference between success and failure, even between life and death. No one needed to be told that seeing every soldier as "army green" rather than their skin color just made sense, regardless of what your personal background might have been.
It wasn't until "diversity training" began that the military became more like the rest of society. I wonder how many otherwise non-biased people began to feel animosity against fellow soldiers after having missed a promotion they deserved due to either explicit or unwritten rules on diversity.