[the truth]

Do you support women only shortlists? (what about shortlists for disabled and ethnic minorities)

[smudgie]

Don't support short lists in general.
Not sure about now but I think years ago if you had a large workforce then a percentage had to be disabled, I do agree with that.

[Livia]

Absolutely not. Anyone on a shortlist should be there for their ability and no other reason.

[joeysteele]

I have surprised myself and voted yes for now.

There are situations where in a selection process that it is easy to go through the motions of seeing and considering everyone but then to avoid choosing certain people or sexes for an opportunity.

So in principle I can see a possible advantage as to shortlists for a period, not always.

I do wonder, especially as to politics, how many women who possibly could have been strong and better MPs were overlooked as candidates decades ago to stand for elections.

In the main however I do also agree with Livia above, that people should gain opportunity from being the best for the job.

[Niamh.]

Obviously the best person for the job should get it and in an ideal world that would be the case but the reason that these "quotas" came into place was because they needed to be because women weren't getting as fair a shot as men, hopefully that's changing now

[Nedusa]

Normally I would say no, however many lists are controlled by men who do not want women high achievers and actively seek to keep women out of the running.

That is the reason unfortunately we have to have some positive discrimination for women as they are playing on a very uneven playing field in many areas.




.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I have surprised myself and voted yes for now.

There are situations where in a selection process that it is easy to go through the motions of seeing and considering everyone but then to avoid choosing certain people or sexes for an opportunity.

So in principle I can see a possible advantage as to shortlists for a period, not always.

I do wonder, especially as to politics, how many women who possibly could have been strong and better MPs were overlooked as candidates decades ago to stand for elections.

In the main however I do also agree with Livia above, that people should gain opportunity from being the best for the job.

A good post Joey, as I agree that 'forcing' a company to interview a given number of a certain 'type' can never ensure that the interviewer allocates the position to anyone on that 'list' anyway if he is secretly prejudiced against that type - even if the best candidate hails from that list.

It's a shame that mandatory 'this' and 'that' is necessary, but sometimes it's unavoidable.

[the truth]

what about careers which are dominated by women, should we then have men only shortlists?

[Vicky.]

Nope..completely disagree with positive discrimination as much as discrimination tbh

[the truth]

what they really need to do is create a fairer society based on EQUALITY RIGHTS AND LAWS. However they can do this by removing obstacles for people looking to become politicians,, poor and rich, old and young, disabled and able bodied. the irony here is by the bias shown in favour of women in the law courts, divorce courts etc then it ends up with more single mothers who end up with lesser chance of making it into career politics..in the end an imbalanced society damages everyone especially the children