@raphjd I always wondered why if certain things are not supposed to be considered, why are they ASKED on job applications?

For instance...
age
marital status
race
whether they have children
etc.

It used to annoy me when I would see people go to job interviews with their real (or fake) wife and their real (or fake) children just to get the job and a bigger salary. If I was hiring someone.. my #1 rule would be to never hire someone that you cannot fire. For instance, if the person applying for the job is married - or even a close friend of someone who already is employed by you.. you can't fire either of them without a problem. If someone is a minority of some sort.. you can't fire them without risking a discrimination lawsuit. If the applicant is a female in her 20's - you risk being stuck paying for 6 months of paid maternity leave, and having your group coverage insurance rates skyrocket - not to mention other reasons for not being able to fire them.

Well now - it is perfectly clear to all of us why YOU never rose to the ranks of the powerful business elite!

For instance...
age
marital status
race
whether they have children
etc.

It used to annoy me when I would see people go to job interviews with their real (or fake) wife and their real (or fake) children just to get the job and a bigger salary. If I was hiring someone.. my #1 rule would be to never hire someone that you cannot fire. For instance, if the person applying for the job is married - or even a close friend of someone who already is employed by you.. you can't fire either of them without a problem. If someone is a minority of some sort.. you can't fire them without risking a discrimination lawsuit. If the applicant is a female in her 20's - you risk being stuck paying for 6 months of paid maternity leave, and having your group coverage insurance rates skyrocket - not to mention other reasons for not being able to fire them.

@bi4smooth

Nope, I never said anything about it being the government.

Diversity is more important than hiring who's best for the job.

Again, you conflate the argument "it's a private company - they can do what they want" with "what they're doing is he right thing to do"...

I do NOT think this is smart - and time will tell. I will say this: I'm glad I don't have any holdings under the control of this company....

Nope, I never said anything about it being the government.

Diversity is more important than hiring who's best for the job.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/state-street-global-advisors-permission-hire-white-men

I would love to know the exact figures that are being demanded for this "diversity" quota.

Will it be like Tony Blair's 35% rule for non-white representation in media, despite that figure being over 3.5 times the non-white figures in the UK population? Now the 35% rule is just under 3.5 times higher than the UK population.

You post this as-if this were some Government rule or law.

This is a company who is challenging their own hiring managers to hire with more diversity.

Is it ham-handed and overkill (IMHO)? Sure! But they could decide to suddenly stop advising people to buy stocks and bonds and invest in Girl Scout Cookies if they wanted to - it's their business! They can run it into the ground if they want to! (No, I don't think hiring minorities and women will run the company into the ground - but I don't think "quotas" are a good start either).