If you sit on a board of directors of some sorts, you should know the stakeholders you’re dealing with, regardless of your age, and therefore know that throwing around “coloured”, which seems harmless to me (a white geeza) is not acceptable these days, use it in the boozer with your pals whatever I’m sure no one will care, but use it on tele, you’ve had one and deserve what’s coming.
As for the appointment, and the pressure to appoint a black member to replace him. Well the entire board is currently white, correct me if I’m wrong. And to quote my boring ACCA textbooks which I’m currently studying day in day out, of the FTSE350 companies, the ones with a board that has a mixture of women and BAME’s, out-perform ones that are all male and all white.
So the regular point that “it should be the best person for the job” is easy on the tongue and I fully get and understand it, you’re actually arguing against independent studies on board diversity. Which you’re free to do of course, but don’t be surprised when people opt for proven studies rather than feelings.
If you sit on a board of directors of some sorts, you should know the stakeholders you’re dealing with, regardless of your age, and therefore know that throwing around “coloured”, which seems harmless to me (a white geeza) is not acceptable these days, use it in the boozer with your pals whatever I’m sure no one will care, but use it on tele, you’ve had one and deserve what’s coming.
As for the appointment, and the pressure to appoint a black member to replace him. Well the entire board is currently white, correct me if I’m wrong. And to quote my boring ACCA textbooks which I’m currently studying day in day out, of the FTSE350 companies, the ones with a board that has a mixture of women and BAME’s, out-perform ones that are all male and all white.
So the regular point that “it should be the best person for the job” is easy on the tongue and I fully get and understand it, you’re actually arguing against independent studies on board diversity. Which you’re free to do of course, but don’t be surprised when people opt for proven studies rather than feelings.
If you sit on a board of directors of some sorts, you should know the stakeholders you’re dealing with, regardless of your age, and therefore know that throwing around “coloured”, which seems harmless to me (a white geeza) is not acceptable these days, use it in the boozer with your pals whatever I’m sure no one will care, but use it on tele, you’ve had one and deserve what’s coming.
As for the appointment, and the pressure to appoint a black member to replace him. Well the entire board is currently white, correct me if I’m wrong. And to quote my boring ACCA textbooks which I’m currently studying day in day out, of the FTSE350 companies, the ones with a board that has a mixture of women and BAME’s, out-perform ones that are all male and all white.
So the regular point that “it should be the best person for the job” is easy on the tongue and I fully get and understand it, you’re actually arguing against independent studies on board diversity. Which you’re free to do of course, but don’t be surprised when people opt for proven studies rather than feelings.
If you sit on a board of directors of some sorts, you should know the stakeholders you’re dealing with, regardless of your age, and therefore know that throwing around “coloured”, which seems harmless to me (a white geeza) is not acceptable these days, use it in the boozer with your pals whatever I’m sure no one will care, but use it on tele, you’ve had one and deserve what’s coming.
As for the appointment, and the pressure to appoint a black member to replace him. Well the entire board is currently white, correct me if I’m wrong. And to quote my boring ACCA textbooks which I’m currently studying day in day out, of the FTSE350 companies, the ones with a board that has a mixture of women and BAME’s, out-perform ones that are all male and all white.
So the regular point that “it should be the best person for the job” is easy on the tongue and I fully get and understand it, you’re actually arguing against independent studies on board diversity. Which you’re free to do of course, but don’t be surprised when people opt for proven studies rather than feelings.
Thing is, I can see why BAME could be offensive. It's basically saying non-white. There's no subtlety, or nuance, it's a clear delimitation, there's white people and there's everyone else in one big heterogeneous block.
As always, it's the inherent difficulty, in a society dominated my the Anglo-Saxon population, in how do you do do you discuss the lack of representation of the various different minority groups without lumping them altogether, with inevitably disregarding and therefore silencing many of the voices within those minorities.
First opened this the other day when it had 10-15 posts. Can't believe some of the posts I've read since.
Being a good person isn't hard. If you really are struggling to know the right thing to say and you unintentionally use a dated term; if someone pulls you up on it (it'll probably happen to all of us at some point) then apologise and make a mental note to not do it again. Again, being a good person isn't hard.
Comments
You couldn't make it up, you really couldn't.
If you sit on a board of directors of some sorts, you should know the stakeholders you’re dealing with, regardless of your age, and therefore know that throwing around “coloured”, which seems harmless to me (a white geeza) is not acceptable these days, use it in the boozer with your pals whatever I’m sure no one will care, but use it on tele, you’ve had one and deserve what’s coming.
As for the appointment, and the pressure to appoint a black member to replace him. Well the entire board is currently white, correct me if I’m wrong. And to quote my boring ACCA textbooks which I’m currently studying day in day out, of the FTSE350 companies, the ones with a board that has a mixture of women and BAME’s, out-perform ones that are all male and all white.
So the regular point that “it should be the best person for the job” is easy on the tongue and I fully get and understand it, you’re actually arguing against independent studies on board diversity. Which you’re free to do of course, but don’t be surprised when people opt for proven studies rather than feelings.
As always, it's the inherent difficulty, in a society dominated my the Anglo-Saxon population, in how do you do do you discuss the lack of representation of the various different minority groups without lumping them altogether, with inevitably disregarding and therefore silencing many of the voices within those minorities.
Being a good person isn't hard. If you really are struggling to know the right thing to say and you unintentionally use a dated term; if someone pulls you up on it (it'll probably happen to all of us at some point) then apologise and make a mental note to not do it again. Again, being a good person isn't hard.