Discovering Higher and Degree Apprenticeships with UWE Bristol, get free advice >>

What is elitism and when is it OK in hiring?

I wonder what peoples feelings are about what the word means especially regarding hiring and what is acceptable.

Im going to give you escalating (in my view, you can disagree of course) levels of "elitism" and what I want you to tell me is, what is OK and what isnt.

Scenario 1
"Intelligent Corp" decides that to be eligible for its jobs you need to have an IQ of over 120 and it makes all applicants sit an IQ test before interview.

Scenario 2
"Investman-Sachs" decides that it only wants to accept applications from students with a 1st or 2.1 in their undergraduate degree.

Scenario 3
"Loser Brothers" decides that it only wants to accept applications from students with good (1 or 2.1) degrees from certain universities which it believes produce smarter students.

Scenario 4
"Old Boy Network Inc" decides that it only wants to accept applications from students with any degree from certain universities which it believes produce students better prepared for the "persuasion" of rich clients for investment.

Scenario 5
"Bullingdon Inc" decides that it only wants to accept applications from white students with numerous city connections because this is the easiest way to get new business.

It would be interesting to hear your thoughts!

Vazzyb :smile:

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Booyah

All except Scenario 5, that is just plain racism

Elitism in my books is okay, all the politicians put down elitist schools when they themselves went to them.

Reply 2

a.partridge

just having 'standards' isn't really elitism or having a uni requiring CCC could be called elitist by CCD applicants (if they had the vocabulary) 1#,2#,3# (depending on whether 3 is judged fairly - who wouldnt take the awarding institution into account?)

#5 is ridiculous and yeah clearly getting into racism there

#4 is the only normal one left in it to be elitist

elitism to me would be having double/non logically justifiable standards like a 2.2 from oxford will do you but a 1st from Kings college london and no way...

Reply 3

7589200

So would you say 4 is wrong or right?

And that is essentially what 3 is saying..."1 or 2.1 degree ok from
xyz but no degree from others"

(edited 11 years ago)

2 is okay.

Original post by Vazzyb

I'd say 4 is elitist but their decision if they have had the best experience with those universities. 5 is just a big fat no no. The rest are fine.

Reply 6

Jarred Kyle

I feel that 'elitism' is, most of the time, not necessary at all for certain occupations. Your education will of course be important although they should not categorise establishments.

Scenario 1 and 2 are fine so long as that's what the job requires.

3 is borderline but 3 and 4, in my opinion, should not categorise certain establishments.

Scenario 5, as said, is purely racism and in this current society is not and should not be tolerated.

Reply 7

goussberry

Original post by Booyah

All except Scenario 5, that is just plain racism

Elitism in my books is okay, all the politicians put down elitist schools when they themselves went to them.

Agreed with the scenario 5 comment.

BTW not all politicians went to elitest schools. Yeah I agree, many many do, but take Wilson & Heath in the 1960s-70s for example. All state school educated PMs :smile:

Reply 8

goussberry

Original post by Vazzyb

Elitism, by my definition, is favouring people from middle-upper/upper classes & those who went to top schools & unis, over those from lower classes or more "mediocre" unis.

Scenario 1... Not elitist. (EG: RAF only employ introverts. That's not elitism)

Scenario 2... Not elitist (unless specified 'we only take Oxbridge applications, won't even consider those from IDK, Reading or West London University).

Scenario 3... More elitist

Scenario 4... Most elitist

Scenario 5... Just plain racism

Reply 9

Joinedup

Well no one's going to be able to prove what your real motives are. You might not want to hire any black british people but you could cover it up by saying you need to hire oxbridge graduates for some red herring of a reason.
Not sayin it's necessarily oxbridges fault it doesn't have many black british students.

Reply 10

Drewski

Original post by goussberry

Elitism, by my definition, is favouring people from middle-upper/upper classes & those who went to top schools & unis, over those from lower classes or more "mediocre" unis.

Scenario 1... Not elitist. (EG: RAF only employ introverts. That's not elitism)
Scenario 2... Not elitist (unless specified 'we only take Oxbridge applications, won't even consider those from IDK, Reading or West London University).

Scenario 3... More elitist

Scenario 4... Most elitist

Scenario 5... Just plain racism

Re bold, you're using that as a hypothetical example, right, not as an example from reality?

Reply 11

goussberry

Original post by Drewski

Re bold, you're using that as a hypothetical example, right, not as an example from reality?

From what I've been told, reality. Am I wrong?

Reply 12

Drewski

Original post by goussberry

From what I've been told, reality. Am I wrong?

Yep.

When I went through and our flight had a test* I was the only one of the 30 to be an introvert. They went as far as saying that, on the whole, they prefer "thinking extroverts", but not to the extent that they'll get rid of people who don't match that. There is an aptitude test, but it test ability at tasks, not personality.

*that our flight did the test was very rare and not the norm.

Reply 13

Drewski

Original post by goussberry

From what I've been told, reality. Am I wrong?

Really, you're going to neg me for politely asking you to clarify something which I then later, again politely, corrected? How precious are you?! :rolleyes:

Reply 14

7589200

Original post by Joinedup

Absolutely but I find it interesting to see if people think that having the 'right' motives for preferring a certain university makes it less elitist.

Reply 15

7589200

The bit in bold: Do you think first year investment bankers need a 1st in Economics to fill in spreadsheets all day long?

Over-qualification happens all the time. But there are obvious benefits - the person moves to a harder job within the organization or requires less supervision .

Reply 16

yothi5

Original post by Vazzyb

I wonder what peoples feelings are about what the word means especially regarding hiring and what is acceptable.

Im going to give you escalating (in my view, you can disagree of course) levels of "elitism" and what I want you to tell me is, what is OK and what isnt.

Scenario 1
"Intelligent Corp" decides that to be eligible for its jobs you need to have an IQ of over 120 and it makes all applicants sit an IQ test before interview.
Nothing wrong with this

Scenario 2
"Investman-Sachs" decides that it only wants to accept applications from students with a 1st or 2.1 in their undergraduate degree.
Nothing wrong with this
Scenario 3
"Loser Brothers" decides that it only wants to accept applications from students with good (1 or 2.1) degrees from certain universities which it believes produce smarter students.
Nothing wrong with this
Scenario 4
"Old Boy Network Inc" decides that it only wants to accept applications from students with any degree from certain universities which it believes produce students better prepared for the "persuasion" of rich clients for investment.
Something wrong with this
Scenario 5
"Bullingdon Inc" decides that it only wants to accept applications from white students with numerous city connections because this is the easiest way to get new business.
?!
It would be interesting to hear your thoughts!

Vazzyb :smile:

Views in bold

Reply 17

johndoranglasgow

To be honest, I think they're all fine.

Employers should have the right to hire and fire whoever the hell they like, it costs more than just the employee's salary to actually have them in your company and at the end of the day forcing employers to take on graduates (directly or indirectly) will only lead to an uncomfortable situation for both parties.

I'll certainly admit that certain mindsets should be discouraged, particularly number 5 but at the end of the day an employer who is hiring is no different than a guy walking into a car dealership - he's spending the cash, so it's his call.

Reply 18

Roger Mexico

Original post by goussberry

Because the 60s and 70s are in any way relevant to current politics, right? Nice going, champ.

Reply 19

Blutooth

Original post by Joinedup

I'm black and Oxbridge and take exception to the above remark. Nah just joking :tongue:

, I know what you mean, but just so you know we do exist and there are quite a few upper class private school brothers too. The statistics are also exaggerated by the media. I mean last year there was a headline figure of 1 black guy getting into OXford when in reality it was more like 70 or so if you include mixed race people - and this is just for undergrad at Oxford. Here are the statistics: http://www.ox.ac.uk/about_the_university/facts_and_figures/undergraduate_admissions_statistics/ethnic_origin.html

I mean from the stats there are roughly 100 South_West asians and 100 Oriental asians getting in. Doesn't seem really disproportionate to have roughly 70 black guys getting in.