Performance evaluation requirements for affirmative action and diversity
Some examples of the kinds of performance measures that can be used to evaluate a manager’s performance in the area of diversity development are listed below.
Manager seeks out and attends diversity development training.
AKA indoctrination.
Manager is effective at recruiting, hiring, promoting and maintaining a diverse workforce.
Better hire that black gay guy who is in a wheel chair.
Manager integrates diversity development into performance planning and evaluation. The manager holds staff accountable for participating in activities that support these efforts. The manager holds staff accountable for behaviors that are exclusionary and offensive.
NOTE: This is the crux of the matter right here. "Behavior that is offensive." I find two guys kissing offensive, you may find the Bible offensive. It's subjective. But in reality it's not, we all know what "offensive" means in this context. The Politburo have drilled it into our heads.
Manager creates and maintains a work environment that is respectful and accepting of diversity. The manager sets clear expectations for expected behaviors and clear methods for reporting inappropriate behaviors.
This really is Soviet style stuff here. Heaven forbid the guy in the cubicle next to you hears you tell someone that you are opposed to illegal immigration (WARNING: offensive) you will be reported to the authorities and given re-education.
Manager assures culturally competent client services.
We habla your language and no habla to ICE.
So you want to get promoted working for the state? Toe the line, parrot back the appopriate phrases, excuse behavior that is disgusting or criminal and insist that things that are holy are forbidden.
4 comments:
And the answer is?
Ron Saxton!!
Manager creates and maintains a work environment that is respectful and accepting of diversity. The manager sets clear expectations for expected behaviors and clear methods for reporting inappropriate behaviors.
This really is Soviet style stuff here. Heaven forbid the guy in the cubicle next to you hears you tell someone that you are opposed to illegal immigration (WARNING: offensive) you will be reported to the authorities and given re-education.
Actually, no. You will be reported, yes. You will then be subjected to 3 days' worth of "investigation" before summarily being found "guilty". Your "discipline" will involve three to five days of suspension without pay. You will be terminated should another "offense" occur.
I don't work for state government, but I've found such Soviet-style repression to be endemic in just about every workplace that retains a "human resources" department.
They all work in much the same way.
I spoke last year with a guy who works as head of human resources for a large company, and I learned some amazing things from him.
Among them: in that convoluted world, your intention does not matter -I'll never forget the line that followed: "all that matters is the perception of the recipient". I kid you not!
I couldn't believe it, so I pressed him a bit further: "Isn't that almost impossible to enforce? I mean, it seems like something out of Orwell - thought-crime."
His reply: It doesn't matter, and no, it's not at all difficult to enforce. The policies are clearly defined, and so all that is required of us is to arrive at a determination that part or parts of the policies may have been violated. The decision is based upon discussion with the accused and the aggrieved. We suspended a worker for a few days because of a reply to an email containing something along the line of "Retirement - it seems like a wonderful thing".
According to him, the worker thought it was humorous, but the co-worker filed a harassment claim with his office, accusing the person of "ageism".
I didn't even know there was such a thing as "ageism", but apparently there is. That really opened my eyes, and that's when I knew for sure that this place is sliding down the chute.
That was one of the most interesting conversations I've had in quite some time. What really blew me away was the complete nonchalance. He was like "oh yeah, this is normal; no big deal".
I'm thinking "WHAT?"
The whole thing got me to poking around. The Oregonian has the same policies. Same with PPS. The more I poked, the more pervasive I found the HR thing to be. It seems unreal to have something like that going on in the USA, but there it is.
I know that I am guilty of hairism, the discrimination of hair on my head.
Constantly amazed at how these p.c. lemmings parade their spineless pandering.
Post a Comment