Racism is alive and well in Britain

[AvalonXQ]

I'm for AA, but let's use the old lawyer trick and ask what number of training positions makes it their hiring practices racist?

Fixed that for you.
If they had a dozen trainee positions, all of which discriminated on the basis of race, but they still didn't racially discriminate in hiring full-time positions, I would still call it disingenuous to talk about their "racist hiring practices" rather than their "racist training program".

This is a real and reasonable distinction. Is no one else getting this?

 

[Ziggurat]

Fixed that for you.
If they had a dozen trainee positions, all of which discriminated on the basis of race, but they still didn't racially discriminate in hiring full-time positions

Hold on. This is the first time I've seen it suggested that the positions are part time. Or are you confusing full time with permanent? Because those are very different things. But I guess it doesn't really matter: jobs can be temporary, part-time, or both.

This is a real and reasonable distinction. Is no one else getting this?

Yet you keep changing your criteria for making this distinction, and you can't defend it when challenged.

 

[bpesta22]

It's not the end of the world, Avalon, but I think that it's clear you are wrong. It's a smegging job.

 

[TraneWreck]

If it's just a "job," why is it called an "internship?" What's the purpose of the distinction if there really is no distinction?

Would you distinguish between employment and internships on your resume? If you were hiring would you want candidates to do so?

 

[AvalonXQ]

It's not the end of the world, Avalon, but I think that it's clear you are wrong. It's a smegging job.

And the zookeeper's pet cat is a smegging animal. If your headline was "zoo allows animals to run loose," I'd still call you on it.

The article is misleading because the two trainee positions are not permanent positions, are special cases, and are rightfully treated differently.

I've held real jobs and I've held internships; I can tell the difference. Can't you?

 

[commandlinegamer]

Training is an exception under the 1976 Race Relations Act whereby a minority can be encouraged if they are under-represented. Five Chinese Crackers puts it quite well:

http://www.fivechinesecrackers.com/2010/06/when-is-job-not-job.html

 

[Ziggurat]

Training is an exception under the 1976 Race Relations Act whereby a minority can be encouraged if they are under-represented. Five Chinese Crackers puts it quite well:

http://www.fivechinesecrackers.com/2010/06/when-is-job-not-job.html

No they didn't. They put it extremely poorly. They say, "A training post is not a job." Well, they're wrong. Pointing out that what Bristol City did was legal doesn't make these positions not jobs. They are. It's a perverse Orwellian manipulation of language to try to claim that paying people money to do what you want them to is somehow not a job. Of course it is. It's a job, even if it's perfectly legal to discriminate in hiring for it. Which is why it falls under an exception to the general rules regarding employment in the 1976 Race Relations act, rather than simply not being covered by them. Hell, your own link points out that it's an exception (they even use that word, and so does that act).

 

[Ziggurat]

If it's just a "job," why is it called an "internship?"

To continue with the zoo metaphors, if a tiger is a cat, why call it a tiger? Because it's a particular kind of cat. An internship may be a particular kind of job, but it's still a job.

 

[funk de fino]

Still cant see the alive and well racism in Britain yet.

Just some posters arguing about the technicalities of what a job is.

 

[bpesta22]

If it's just a "job," why is it called an "internship?" What's the purpose of the distinction if there really is no distinction?

Would you distinguish between employment and internships on your resume? If you were hiring would you want candidates to do so?

Principles of categorization:

Super ordinate level: Fruit

Basic level: apple

Sub ordinate level: Mackintosh apple.


Do the math on the job / intern thing and see if you can figure it out.

 

[bpesta22]

DOL guidelines / dol.gov. Unless you tossers across the pond do it different!

The Division utilizes the following six-factor test to determine whether an individual is an employee or a "trainee" under the Fair Labor Standards Act:

1. The training, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to what would be given in a vocational school or academic educational instruction;
2. The training is for the benefit of the trainees;
3. The trainees do not displace regular employees, but work under their close observation;
4. The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the trainees, and on occasion the employer’s operations may actually be impeded;
5. The trainees are not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period; and
6. The employer and the trainees understand that the trainees are not entitled to wages for the time spent in training.

 

[funk de fino]

DOL guidelines / dol.gov. Unless you tossers across the pond do it different!

The Division utilizes the following six-factor test to determine whether an individual is an employee or a "trainee" under the Fair Labor Standards Act:

1. The training, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to what would be given in a vocational school or academic educational instruction;
2. The training is for the benefit of the trainees;
3. The trainees do not displace regular employees, but work under their close observation;
4. The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the trainees, and on occasion the employer’s operations may actually be impeded;
5. The trainees are not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period; and
6. The employer and the trainees understand that the trainees are not entitled to wages for the time spent in training.

This is the UK. We are part of Europe. We do not spell it Labor. Of course we do things that are different than you. Do we execute murderers, do we give life sentences that mean life, do we allow our citizens to shoot unarmed strangers in the back and get off scot free, do we allow people to gamble online?

You're bringing a baseball to a cricket match.

 

[TraneWreck]

Principles of categorization:

Super ordinate level: Fruit

Basic level: apple

Sub ordinate level: Mackintosh apple.


Do the math on the job / intern thing and see if you can figure it out.

So what's the general category here? "job"? "employment"?

And the sub-set of "jobs" is "jobs" and "internship"?

You're just engaging in semantic hackary. The point remains that internships are clearly distinguishable from professional employment. Every employer asks you to make this distinction on resumes.

It's only ad hoc bluster at the notion that a government is trying to even the playing field that even leads to this sort of silliness.

Go on to any employment website. Do they distinguish "internships" from other sorts of jobs?

 

[TraneWreck]

To continue with the zoo metaphors, if a tiger is a cat, why call it a tiger? Because it's a particular kind of cat. An internship may be a particular kind of job, but it's still a job.

Me: Lions and Tigers aren't the same thing.

You: Yes-huh, they're both cats.

Me: yes, but they can still be distinguished, we do it all the time.

You: they're both cats.

Ok, awesome point, so what? Whatever nomenclature you want to attach, an internship is easily distinguishable from more professional forms of employment. This distinction is easily made on the contractual level.

You have your panties in a bundle over the word "job."

 

[bpesta22]

This is the UK. We are part of Europe. We do not spell it Labor. Of course we do things that are different than you. Do we execute murderers, do we give life sentences that mean life, do we allow our citizens to shoot unarmed strangers in the back and get off scot free, do we allow people to gamble online?

You're bringing a baseball to a cricket match.

This is unAmerican and I will pray for you.

 

[bpesta22]

Me: Lions and Tigers aren't the same thing.

You: Yes-huh, they're both cats.

Me: yes, but they can still be distinguished, we do it all the time.

You: they're both cats.

Ok, awesome point, so what? Whatever nomenclature you want to attach, an internship is easily distinguishable from more professional forms of employment. This distinction is easily made on the contractual level.

You have your panties in a bundle over the word "job."

But you guys are arguing that a lion (internship) is not a cat (job).

 

[Ziggurat]

Me: Lions and Tigers aren't the same thing.

No, TW, that's not what you claimed. You didn't claim that internships were not the same thing as non-internships, you claimed that internships weren't jobs. That's the equivalent of saying that tigers aren't cats.

You have your panties in a bundle over the word "job."

If the nomenclature doesn't matter, then why were you trying to claim that internships weren't jobs? If your position doesn't depend on them not being jobs, why did you fight that point at all?

 

[TraneWreck]

But you guys are arguing that a lion (internship) is not a cat (job).

No, TW, that's not what you claimed. You didn't claim that internships were not the same thing as non-internships, you claimed that internships weren't jobs. That's the equivalent of saying that tigers aren't cats.

If the nomenclature doesn't matter, then why were you trying to claim that internships weren't jobs? If your position doesn't depend on them not being jobs, why did you fight that point at all?

Once you've distinguished internships from other forms of employment, what word would you like to use for the non-internship jobs?

If you don't deny there's an important distinction, why were you pissy about the word "job" in the first place? When the original point was made, distinguishing internships from "jobs," for the lack of a better term (I don't recall who brought this up), was the meaning not clear?

In your zeal to condemn this exceedingly mild program you first attempted to challenge the distinction made. When it became obvious you doubled-down on the trivial, becoming blustery about the word "job." Was the meaning ever unclear?

 

[bpesta22]

Threads evolve-- my interest here is academic. I teach an employment law class and I am not a lawyer, so I often question my knowledge in the area. It is indeed important to me to determine whether an internship is an employment relationship is a job.

What I was replying to is the argument somewhere above that this is not really a big deal because it's not a job but a training opportunity.

Other key distinctions: at will versus union jobs; independent contractors versus true employees; apprentice versus intern.

 

[TraneWreck]

Threads evolve-- my interest here is academic. I teach an employment law class and I am not a lawyer, so I often question my knowledge in the area. It is indeed important to me to determine whether an internship is an employment relationship is a job.

What I was replying to is the argument somewhere above that this is not really a big deal because it's not a job but a training opportunity.

Other key distinctions: at will versus union jobs; independent contractors versus true employees; apprentice versus intern.

Ok, fair enough, I am a lawyer, if you want to make legal distinctions, I can follow that.

But again, what word would you like to use, what word should have been used, for non-internship employment opportunities?