Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I was like hmm... hmm... hmm... YUP
this is basically how publishing works, too
Every single person in middle management down is women. Scroll to the bottom, the senior management is four blokes.
YOU HAVE TO SCROLL TO THE BOTTOM!
all women all women all women...then oh
If those 4 blokes are genuinely the best at their job then fine.
But at the same time I can't be bothered to substantiate or defend my post. I don't want to be one of those people who posts in threads about gender equality, particularly when I could be thinking of songs with the number 74 in the title.
I'll take "vanishingly tiny odds that this is in fact the case" for 50 points, tho
And then recruited everyone else.
dude we really need to meet some chicks.
I HAVE AN IDEA
For the South East, yeah. Anyway your hired when can you start?
Does this company's recruitment policy reflect a sexist attitude?
Does this company's recruitment policy offend your belief in gender sexuality?
might have been better.
we don't need to preface answers to a question with IN MY OPINION
those are rubbish questions
two from the middle and none from the bottom please Christopher.
all of 'Accounts Management' please.
suggests that they're all pretty hanging.
bang on match for my industry
(bar in Manchester with a reputation for stunning female bar staff) looking for a job when I was a scruffy spotty student and the manager said nothing, just kind of stared me down with this look of utter contempt until I turned and walked out again.
but I had to suck him off just like everyone else
and not in a do they need a cleaner sense.
N Y Y N Y
Y N N Y
N N N N N
N Y Y Y Y
N N N
N Y Y
They look like absolute cunts of the highest order
I AM NOT A SEXIST
but overall, good shout
this isn't that unusual. I remember the customer care/accounts team in my first job after leaving university being almost entirely comprised of women.
I've never really figured out whether it's because more women apply to those roles or whether it's merely assumed that they're better at them and hiring practices reflect that.
about the pervy one who's in charge of recruitment
"Ogle" for a surname.
someone at that office will see a spike in traffic to the site and will find this thread and then they'll feel bad for Ogle.
Personally, I think she looks lovely. They're all lovely and I'm sure they're all valued colleagues. Call me, Ogle!
herself to make sure her Twitter/FB is sufficiently private, and she'll potentially find this thread.
Fortunately for her, there's a famous Kelly Ogle in America.
then Kelly Ogle's next job will be AT Go-Ogle.
so weird - this is the company i work for!
keep it up, it's honestly so funny
Girl_on_Film is the joke account of a male poster and Dan Gardner is one of the senior management blokes. It's really, really funny.
I googled the name and was trying to see the link to either:
1. an ex crewe/halifax footballer
2. Canadian journalist/author
I was struggling
I've found someone on twitter who knows a bunch of people who work there
does anyone want any phone numbers?
I'd say no
It's as sexist as all those ads that say shit like "mum knows Fairy is fucking mint" and "give mum the night off."
who wants to touch me?
... Budget, can I come round and watch your massive TV please?
Best delete thread now - admins!!!!!
this did just blow up on twitter
Unfortunately not down to us
Meet the staff at Cellular Sol http://www.cellularsol.co.uk/meet-the-staff . Or is that pronounced Cellular Arseholes?
that was quick
went down for scheduled maintenance, eh?
only all the photos will have beards drawn on in Paint.
has this been all a twitter or something? surely DiS doesn't have that kind of power
but becasue brusma ruins everything he informed me that someone else just beat me to it
people did rip my tweet of with staggering speed though, the bastards
check the actual image
fire all the women, replace with men
Is this suggesting it was a hack not a deliberate take down by the company?
*Leave thread disappointed*
imagine the women are gonna hear about this and they're not gonna feel especially great about it.
So..... More sexist to point out an organisation where 100% of the males in the company hold 100% of the senior roles, and have seemingly implemented a recruitment policy that only employs young females, than it is to be one of those males that has implemented that recruitment policy.
Also, what are the girls going to hear about? That they work for a company where 100% of the males in the company hold 100% of the senior roles, and have seemingly implemented a recruitment policy that only employs young females? I think they already know that. They work there after all.
is that even that rare? especially for a company with only ~30 employees. it's certainly the norm that companies employ women on the lowest wage/skill jobs and men in senior management. look at this humorous demonstration of widespread inequality! http://100percentmen.tumblr.com/
why pick out this particular example as somehow implausible? like, has it never occurred to you that this is basically what most companies look like? sure, the photos and the way it highlights it are kind of funny because it's just so stark. the employment stats of this company are an instantiation of *structural gender inequality*. to assume that these women couldn't have just been the best candidates who applied and that there must be a discriminatory 'policy' of only employing - in your view - young women is a really huge assumption. they might well have such a policy but given that such huge *structural gender inequality* exists, you might want to investigate instead why it is that this type of job is seen as something a woman should do rather than a man and why it attracts more women (cause PR/comms jobs generally do). and would you have noticed if you were looking at a page full of men and maybe considered that they must have some 'policy' of only employing men? cause a lot of place must have that policy then... unfortunately this problem isn't as simple as shoddy recruitment practices.
btw, none of them are girls. theyre all grown ups and some of them are probably older than you.
I don't disagree with anything you've said that, just the assertion that it's more sexist to point something out that to administer it
not really comparable but i agree with s_h in principle that highlighting it is a bit weird and probably quite disempowering for the women who work there who are now being undermined and represented in the media as unworthy/overpromoted.
I can understand the arguments above, but I think they'd have more weight if there was even one woman at the most senior level. Any blame falling has to go on the shitty people in charge of hiring, not the people reporting the situation; it's the hirers who have the meaningful causal relationship to the situation.
did these 4 guys get together and decide to start their own firm? did they progress from similar roles to the ones that these women are in? is that even generally the typical career progression in that sector?
'it's the hirers who have the meaningful causal relationship to the situation.'
you don't even know that. did three of those guys promote the other one up from middle management over one of the women? maybe none of the handful of women in middle management in this company WANT to be a senior manager. WHY OUT OF THE WHOLE SEXIST WORLD PICK THESE FOUR MEN IN THIS ONE STUPID PR COMPANY AS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF INJUSTICE?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz snore zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
we shouldn't ASSUME that the ONLY EXPLANATION is a policy of DISCRIMINATION.
however it's POSSIBLE that there DOES exist such a policy.
As my industry is set up pretty much 100% like this. I wouldn't assume there is definitely discrimination happening, but fuck me I I had to put a tenner down one way or the other I know which way I'd lean.
have you fully considered the extent to which people are socialised to thinking certain jobs are gendered and how this affects 1. the applicant - their confidence, how they present their personality in an interview for a particular job, how they relate to other interviewees and staff they come into contact with through networking 2. the interviewer 3. the entire application process and all that remains 'unspoken' within it. it's pretty spooky when you think about how our entire cultural/interpretive repertoire is deeply gendered. i know i still quite recently unconsciously associated the word 'doctor' with a man. its spooky. 4. the job role and how people are appraised etc etc etc
perhaps this whole thread has just focused too much on one specific aspect of everything, idk
Going to bed now
maybe see you friday
I might send a CV in whilst they swiftly look for male applicants
"Yeah, they just bin male CVs! It's outrageous, but Damien only likes thin girls as they aren't lazy"
i work at a place who does business with the site he's linked so was curious
Their recruitmemt policy is prejudiced against men
"Sorry, our site is down for maintenance.
We hope to have it back online very soon"
is supposed to be sexist.
really female-oriented. They also tend to be the sort of roles that (in organisations that aren't specifically dedicated to those roles) management understand least, deem least important and get rid of when times are tough.
So it goes.