Question

[Jokersvirus]

So im working on 50% of my final for one of my classes and I came to the final part which speaks of affirmative action and whom to hire.


TL;DR:

Mr green has to hire one of two people, first person is June Triss,
extremely intelligent but lacks common sense,
master's degree Magna cum laude graduate.
Ambitious, said she would have plant manager position within 3 years,
poor personality,
members of the management group did not like her.
Threaten law suit if not hired.
Three years experience as assistant personnel manager at leading nonunion department store, no union relation experience
Mediocre references from cornell and department store

Second person is Bob Young,
Three years of college as a personnel major forced to transfer for econ reason got a degree in history graduated in middle third of his class
five years experience as assistant personnel manager in a 500 emplyee unionized paper box plant
good references
Excellent personality
Not very aggressive


So the question is this.. If you were asking this question Who would you hire?


I would Hire Bob, He has experience as an assistant personnel manager in a unionized plant, he has good references from his college and excellent from his old plant
everyone seems to like him, those who have spoken with him. He is an overall team player, he will get along with everyone. Reason I wouldnt pick June is because she is too cocky, getting ahead of herself throwing out an attitude of "im better than you" and making threats of law suit if she didnt get the job. She is smart, but if you have someone coming in that cocky and hotheaded it only would lead to conflict. I think that bob is the better choice.

Im asking for input to see if you guys can show me a side im not looking at or not seeing.

Thanks

[LiNuX]

I'd go with Bob too. Also, June can't sue if not hired unless she's disabled in some way and the employer solely based his reason for not hiring her on her disability.

[insert_cliche_here]

Bob all the way. Equal opportunity means equal opportunity. It doesn't mean women, or people of a different ethnicity or with a disability or whatever get special treatment. If she's threatening to sue if she doesn't get the job, that's just got bad news written all over it. And like Linux said, she is either misinformed or incredibly arrogant- unless she has evidence that she was denied employment because of her gender she has no case.
But then again, maybe she's just having a streak of bad luck. Maybe she's actually a lovely person and she's just getting desperate about finding a job. Having said that, she's a grown woman, she should be able to conduct herself professionally despite any personal things going on.
So I'm still gonna go with Bob.

[Jokersvirus]

Thanks for the input so far, I am rereading this over and over to make sure I added enough information for you guys to make a informed decision. And I think I have personally have.

[jango]

It might just be something lost in the translation, but I don't see this as a balanced question to even ask. I kinda expected them to have more of a trade-off than 'good/bad' attributes to make it a challenging question to answer, and how this relates to 'affirmative action' is beyond me. I can't help but feel there's a missing element or two to both Bob and June's history/story to make this a challenging question, worthy of debate .. it's kind've obvious with how it's phrased.

So, I'm not really able to answer with the information provided.

[Jokersvirus]

Well I will give all the information I was given:

"Mr. Green, vice president of personnel, of the Hackney Paper Box Company, has to make a deision on whom to hire to be Personnel maanager of a 125 employee Hackney box plant located in Philly.

The company affirmative action office has strongly advised him to hire a young black woman, June Triss, who has applied. But Mr green believes a young white male applicant, Bob Young, to be better qualified for this job. Mr Green has narrowed the field to these two. Hackney has 47 small plants, each with a white male personnel manager. There are no other management level personnel employees in the company except at corporate HQ, where there are 10 management level white employees. Of Hackney approx 1,000 management level employees only six are black, two are mexican american, six are female. Prior to 1964 no management level person were from any minority group and there were no females in management."

I hate how this is a bit of a race issue it seems.

"Both triss and youn had answered an ad in the New york times. The ad set minimum qualifications of a college degree and three years experience as an assistant personnel manage. The Ad did not say what kind of experience as an assistant personnel maanager and did not say union relations experience was necessary."

[jango]

Tbh this makes a huge difference .. and is definitely what was missing. Also it doesn't bare a great deal of similarity to what you initially posted hehe, in terms of balance .. but hey, nevermind.

From experience of hiring and firing I would say that I would invite both of them in and draw their experience together in parallel. I would hire NEITHER of them based on the information provided, and would require more to make an informed decision about their employment. To me race/gender isn't (and shouldn't ever be) even vaguely an issue in employment, and the same can be said for gender - either you're the right person for the job or you're not. Regardless of what claims people might make after a decision has been made, if your focus is on employing the right (and by 'right' I mean the best experience, well-rounded individual for the job) becomes a no-brainer to justify to any drama-mongering. Again, from personal experience, I've never allowed external forces to influence my decision especially as if a mistake is made the only person who should be accountable should be the decision-maker.

To be frank I find even with a little more detail the information given focuses too much on the set-up of the company (in terms of racial/gender ratios specifically) rather than the more relevant point of the individual's experience, qualifications, and aptitude for the job. In all honesty if I was given this choice in the real world (which I've never, ever seen happen, ever) I would tell the outside influences to back off, and focus on what's important here - hiring the right person for the job. All the race/gender issues are complete red herrings, and without more detail of the people involved (rather than the emotive issues that are being prodded at in this rather unsophisticated, evocative way which only attempts to distract someone from what needs to be done here) there's nothing more to be said.

Race/gender isn't a primary issue, no matter how people might prefer to focus on 'difference' as if it matters in these circumstances - the people (who they are, what they're about, etc) is more important. Anything more than that is insulting, crass and frankly supremely ignorant, and seeing race or gender before the person themselves is what keeps certain people stuck in the dark ages and reinforcing stereotypes. Seeing past it is the only answer, and only more information about them as people would lead me personally to an answer on who to hire.


I hate how this is a bit of a race issue it seems.

That's kinda the point ..

[Jokersvirus]

You are 100% right Jango

Honestly I dont see how that information i gave can make a huge difference, explaining how there are only so many managers that are different races and sexes doesnt really seem like important info. Seems more like stats to me with no valid purpose.

Like you said its not about race or gender its about who they are. and what they're about. overall, I think Bob is still a good canidate for the position, but that is just personally me still. everyone else who replied might change their mind.

[W1CKEDTW1STED]

I agree with Jango, I wouldn't hire either also.

However, if you had to chose one, I'd go with Bob.

[Jokersvirus]

Ya overall my response for picking him was he was a team player he lacked education but he made it up with good work ethics and being a kind person while at work.

[W1CKEDTW1STED]

Ya overall my response for picking him was he was a team player he lacked education but he made it up with good work ethics and being a kind person while at work.

You know, now that I am second thinking this... It maybe a trick question, ya know? *shrug*

Good luck. Let us know how this plays out. I'm curious what your teacher will say or do...

[Jokersvirus]

I had to pick one rather pick someone who is nice instead of someone who is cocky.