Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

What is elitism and when is it OK in hiring?

Announcements Posted on
    • 10 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    oh dear god you have said so many things that are BS i cant even be bothered to answer to them. People don't get equal opportunities in real life, that's true, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't.
    I think it's more along the lines of you can't answer them... nothing I've said is 'BS'.

    I hate this childish attitude that everyone should be treated the same. We are all different and we all have different strengths and weaknesses. Why on earth should this not be considered by an employer if it has an impact on the job that person performs?

    I find you ignorant, idealistic and clueless to be perfectly honest.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (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.

    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
    I am completely fine with the first four. No issue whatsoever, a business ought to be free to decide who to hire on any basis it likes when it comes to educational backgrounds.

    Racism is where I draw the line. That isn't acceptable to me.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    I think it's more along the lines of you can't answer them... nothing I've said is 'BS'.

    I hate this childish attitude that everyone should be treated the same. We are all different and we all have different strengths and weaknesses. Why on earth should this not be considered by an employer if it has an impact on the job that person performs?

    I find you ignorant, idealistic and clueless to be perfectly honest.
    Well of course you'd say it isn't bs, you're the one who said it! It doesn't add anything to your argument and you're just doing an ad hominem by suggesting I'm too stupid to come up with valid replies. Maybe I'm tired, or maybe I just can't be arsed?

    I don't believe that some people are inferior to others. I'm sorry if you feel differently. I don't see this as reason for you to call me ignorant, idealistic and clueless. You could have kept that to yourself tbh.

    I can't stand people like you who think that just because things work a certain way, that it's right. For what its worth I think these employers and rich businesspeople you talk about are greedy and corrupt and wouldn't know morality if it hit them in the face.

    End of discussion.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=Dmon1Unlimited;37400456] if a person can do a job with a pass grade and you say you want a 1st from applicants, then that is elitist...QUOTE]

    It's understandable though. Why would you want someone mediocre doing a job when you could have someone with excellent intelligence?
    Unless you were worried that they would do the job too well and usurp you.

    Also, this sometimes works in opposite ways. For example, when my uncle was looking for someone to work in his warehouse, he rejected the more highly qualified people and went for people with fewer qualifications and a worse history, to give them a chance to do something positive.

    Also, 1 and 2 are fine. 3 could be ok in some circumstances. 4 is not ok and 5 is racist. xo
    • 10 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    Well of course you'd say it isn't bs, you're the one who said it! It doesn't add anything to your argument and you're just doing an ad hominem by suggesting I'm too stupid to come up with valid replies. Maybe I'm tired, or maybe I just can't be arsed?
    Well of course you would say it is BS, you're the one arguing against it. The point is you backed up that statement with nothing at all. Yet again you're putting words in my mouth, I didn't say you were to stupid to make a reply, I said that you couldn't because the points I made are undeniable (IMO anyway).

    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    I don't believe that some people are inferior to others. I'm sorry if you feel differently. I don't see this as reason for you to call me ignorant, idealistic and clueless. You could have kept that to yourself tbh.
    Sigh, words in my mouth again.. I didn't use the word inferior, nor do I believe human life should be valued on the basis of any of the previously mentioned attributes. However, should employers view certain candidates as superior? Of course they should. Maybe we should give everyone a go at every job right, just to be fair? Then going in for surgery can be like playing a round of roulette! Or perhaps we should give people who lack a strong mathematical ability control of investing your life savings? Does that sound fair? Yes these are random examples, but surely this demonstrates to you that employers should base their decisions on what people are able to do and not some delusion of fairness? I stress again, this is with regards to peoples ability to do the job, so not the colour of their skin or anything as baseless as that.

    The reason I called you those things is because that is how you have portrayed yourself in my opinion. As far as I'm concerned, you were rude to me first when you dismissed my valid arguments as 'BS' that you couldn't be bothered responding to.

    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    I can't stand people like you who think that just because things work a certain way, that it's right. For what its worth I think these employers and rich businesspeople you talk about are greedy and corrupt and wouldn't know morality if it hit them in the face.

    End of discussion.
    OK so here we hit the truth. It would appear you have some past grievances which has led you to these opinions. But can you honestly and justifiably pigeon hole 'employers and rich business people' as 'greedy and corrupt' in the same post that you claim nobody is inferior? It would appear you are the one who has the issue. I am saying employers have every right to view people objectively based on the value they can bring to a business, whereas you are saying employers are corrupt and everyone should be given equal employment opportunities. Perhaps we should all just join a queue and be allocated jobs on a first come first serve basis? Who do you honestly believe has this the right way around?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    You're mistaking intelligence with knowledge. IQ tests don't require knowledge, it's all puzzle solving. Either you think that way or you do not. You can't draw upon practical experience and knowledge in order to know which image comes next in a sequence!

    No but if you've practiced on IQ tests you'd be surprised at the improvements you'd make. I also think it's possible to improve the subconscious aspects of the mind through practice etc- just this takes longer than ordinary practice/ revision.


    That's not to say you can't improve by practising the tests (although IMO this rather defeats the purpose unless you can practice in real life situations), but you will only improve so much as it is ultimately an aptitude test. Also Mensa does consider the age of children, they require lower scores to gain a place. So it is fair to say there is some leeway up until 16 (I believe, might be 14).
    Yup, we probably do have a limit but it's likely most people get nowhere near the limits of what their minds are capabale of. Lol I probably sound like a JEdi saying this. Also to reiterate, I am suggesting that intelligence is intertwined with knowledge and practice and that it is impossible to disentangle them for the purposes of measuring IQ. I had taken up some serious mathematical studies (STEP mathematics papers) and I have found I've got a lot better at the logical type IQ tests- it brought to light new ways of thinking of problems and honed my problem solving skills.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    Well of course you would say it is BS, you're the one arguing against it. The point is you backed up that statement with nothing at all. Yet again you're putting words in my mouth, I didn't say you were to stupid to make a reply, I said that you couldn't because the points I made are undeniable (IMO anyway).



    Sigh, words in my mouth again.. I didn't use the word inferior, nor do I believe human life should be valued on the basis of any of the previously mentioned attributes. However, should employers view certain candidates as superior? Of course they should. Maybe we should give everyone a go at every job right, just to be fair? Then going in for surgery can be like playing a round of roulette! Or perhaps we should give people who lack a strong mathematical ability control of investing your life savings? Does that sound fair? Yes these are random examples, but surely this demonstrates to you that employers should base their decisions on what people are able to do and not some delusion of fairness? I stress again, this is with regards to peoples ability to do the job, so not the colour of their skin or anything as baseless as that.

    The reason I called you those things is because that is how you have portrayed yourself in my opinion. As far as I'm concerned, you were rude to me first when you dismissed my valid arguments as 'BS' that you couldn't be bothered responding to.



    OK so here we hit the truth. It would appear you have some past grievances which has led you to these opinions. But can you honestly and justifiably pigeon hole 'employers and rich business people' as 'greedy and corrupt' in the same post that you claim nobody is inferior? It would appear you are the one who has the issue. I am saying employers have every right to view people objectively based on the value they can bring to a business, whereas you are saying employers are corrupt and everyone should be given equal employment opportunities. Perhaps we should all just join a queue and be allocated jobs on a first come first serve basis? Who do you honestly believe has this the right way around?
    Inequality isn't about strengths and weakenesses, as you said, it is about some people being inferior to others.

    By your analogies I don't think you understand what equality of opportunity means.

    I'm going to bed.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    Children and teenagers are not less intelligent than adults :facepalm: that's not how it works. in any case there are specialised iq tests for children of various ages in proportion to their stage of development. So a child wouldn't take the same iq test as an adult as that would be unfair.

    If I'm 20 and I have a lower than average iq there is little i can do to change that.
    I don't mean to get bogged down in the semantics of the word intelligence but...
    I've seen teenagers and adults and they are less intelligent in a conventional sense. I know these specialised IQ tests are measuring a child's intelligence relative to his peers, but this is simply because that child would not be able to record a decent a score if they were made to do an adult's IQ test. Does this not unequivocally show a child is less intelligent than an adult?

    However, kids are quicker at learning things due to the brain's plasticity at a younger age.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    ..
    Don't go to sleep :P. It also used to be the case that girls scored higher in IQ tests than boys but then iq tests were changed to redress this bias. Now you might argue that the Iq tests were unfairly suited to girls' strengths or you might say that girls are cleverer than boys. But the difficulties inherent in designing iq tests when there is a spectrum of different intelligence seems to render IQ tests as a limited indicator.

    Coming back to the redesigned IQ tests for toddlers, I might again ask the question, how do I know that you are just not fiddling with the tests to suit your preconceived conclusion that iq is immutable over the years? Is this not similar to the case above where iq tests were redesigned so that they would fit the bias of the day ie. that boys were as smart or smarter than girls?

    It seems like in designing Iq tests, to an extent, we already have to second-guess the conclusions of the test.
    • 10 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blutooth)
    Yup, we probably do have a limit but it's likely most people get nowhere near the limits of what their minds are capabale of. Lol I probably sound like a JEdi saying this. Also to reiterate, I am suggesting that intelligence is intertwined with knowledge and practice and that it is impossible to disentangle them for the purposes of measuring IQ. I had taken up some serious mathematical studies (STEP mathematics papers) and I have found I've got a lot better at the logical type IQ tests- it brought to light new ways of thinking of problems and honed my problem solving skills.
    Well who am I to argue with your personal experience, fair enough

    Now May the 4th be with you! (4 hours late, but had to be done)
    • 10 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrHappy_J)
    Inequality isn't about strengths and weakenesses, as you said, it is about some people being inferior to others.

    By your analogies I don't think you understand what equality of opportunity means.

    I'm going to bed.
    Sigh. So then you agree with me in saying a candidate with a higher IQ or better education etc (strengths) can be favoured over one without those attributes?

    I think you've run out of things to say.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by escape)
    It's understandable though. Why would you want someone mediocre doing a job when you could have someone with excellent intelligence?
    Unless you were worried that they would do the job too well and usurp you.

    Also, this sometimes works in opposite ways. For example, when my uncle was looking for someone to work in his warehouse, he rejected the more highly qualified people and went for people with fewer qualifications and a worse history, to give them a chance to do something positive.

    Also, 1 and 2 are fine. 3 could be ok in some circumstances. 4 is not ok and 5 is racist. xo
    its understandable to feel "OMGWTFWOBBAFET awesome" at the thought of having awesome employees....but its not fair...its like mcdonalds hiring only masters graduates who have a 1st.... its *******s... if a moron can do the job, then you make it so that morons and higher can apply for the job... whats the point in adding higher requirements for this position? and people wonder why there are people who cant find jobs...

    thats not elitisms doing though... thats just your uncle being nice...

    with number 1, IQ doesnt necessarily reflect how good an officer you may be... and what if youre the type that doesnt do good in tests yet are quite smart?
    • 10 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dmon1Unlimited)
    its understandable to feel "OMGWTFWOBBAFET awesome" at the thought of having awesome employees....but its not fair...its like mcdonalds hiring only masters graduates who have a 1st.... its *******s... if a moron can do the job, then you make it so that morons and higher can apply for the job... whats the point in adding higher requirements for this position? and people wonder why there are people who cant find jobs...

    thats not elitisms doing though... thats just your uncle being nice...

    with number 1, IQ doesnt necessarily reflect how good an officer you may be... and what if youre the type that doesnt do good in tests yet are quite smart?
    Ugh, why is everyone convinced that getting a job should be fair? It's a competitive world, may the best man win...

    Interesting fact. I've been offered multiple graduate jobs (due to graduate next month), including offers from some of the most highly rated graduate employers. Yet when I applied for a part-time position at McDonalds during the summer, the elitist bastards rejected me at the application stage. The cheek of it! Didn't even get a blooming interview...

    \Rant
    • 22 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 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...
    harsh
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    Ugh, why is everyone convinced that getting a job should be fair? It's a competitive world, may the best man win...

    Interesting fact. I've been offered multiple graduate jobs (due to graduate next month), including offers from some of the most highly rated graduate employers. Yet when I applied for a part-time position at McDonalds during the summer, the elitist bastards rejected me at the application stage. The cheek of it! Didn't even get a blooming interview...

    \Rant
    because being a **** isnt cool? competitive bull****... if you have more than one applicant applying for a job then fair enough with picking the superior.... but this is about requirements...competitive=atlea st people with lower academics can fight for a position...but requirements=they have to sod off for no reason... like with my other example... you dont demand 1sts from people if youre just a mcdonalds worker... if a moron can do a job, what the hell is the point of requiring oxbridge status people? those people will still be doing said jobs.... the entire damn planet isnt filled with elites, they are a minority and youre essentially only giving these jobs to the minority and letting the rest get screwed over...

    that could be a problem with loyalty...they possibly want people who will work there and stay there.... this could be one of the many reasons why they rejected you... you could have the most awesome cv ever, but that doesnt mean every place has to bend over for you

    \rational rant

    QUOTE ME then and tell me why im wrong...
    • 10 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dmon1Unlimited)
    because being a **** isnt cool? competitive bull****... if you have more than one applicant applying for a job then fair enough with picking the superior.... but this is about requirements... like with my other example... you dont demand 1sts from people if youre just a mcdonalds worker... if a moron can do a job, what the hell is the point of requiring oxbridge status people? those people will still be doing said jobs.... the entire damn planet isnt filled with elites, they are a minority and youre essentially only giving these jobs to the minority and letting the rest get screwed over...

    that could be a problem with loyalty...they possibly want people who will work there and stay there.... this could be one of the many reasons why they rejected you... you could have the most awesome cv ever, but that doesnt mean every place has to bend over for you
    OK well if McDonalds are requiring a first, or indeed any type of degree, I totally agree with you that is stupendous. A degree doesn't imply that person can do the job better, so why should it be a requirement. OK agreed. But... McDonalds doesn't require a degree! My witty little example (yes you're quite right that is most likely why they didn't give me a summer job) proves that they most certainly don't want a degree. So where's the problem? Can you give me an example of somewhere which is asking for something which you think is unrealistic in comparison to the role?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    OK well if McDonalds are requiring a first, or indeed any type of degree, I totally agree with you that is stupendous. A degree doesn't imply that person can do the job better, so why should it be a requirement. OK agreed. But... McDonalds doesn't require a degree! My witty little example (yes you're quite right that is most likely why they didn't give me a summer job) proves that they most certainly don't want a degree. So where's the problem? Can you give me an example of somewhere which is asking for something which you think is unrealistic in comparison to the role?
    like i said, there could be many reasons why they rejected you, it may not neccessarily be about degrees so that proves nothing... and whether its fair or not is a different sort of argument... not every place will be like mcdonalds or be anti-academic

    there was a user on here who made a thread and posted one of those job listing sites... it was to do with a science career i think.... if my memory is correct, it was incredibly specific... they asked that the applicants have high degrees from certain universities... as if all other unis are just degree printing factories or something where you dont actually learn anything...

    i know the thread exists, but good luck in trying to find it...
    • 10 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dmon1Unlimited)
    like i said, there could be many reasons why they rejected you... i gave you an example of the problem...loyalty...

    there was a user on here who made a thread and posted one of those job listing sites... it was to do with a science career i think.... if my memory is correct, it was incredibly specific... they asked that the applicants have high degrees from certain universities... as if all other unis are just degree printing factories or something where you dont actually learn anything...

    i know the thread exists, but good luck in trying to find it...
    Certain universities are known to provide a better education. That's not to say there won't be strong candidates from elsewhere, but it is an expensive process to sift through applications and conduct interviews. It makes business sense in many situations to narrow down the requirements to save on resources. Why receive 500 applicants from all universities and narrow that down to 50 for interview when you could receive 100 applicants from 5 universities and narrow that down to 25 interviews. Simplistic example I know, but that is why it is done. I'm not saying it's a great system, but it is an efficient one.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    Certain universities are known to provide a better education. That's not to say there won't be strong candidates from elsewhere, but it is an expensive process to sift through applications and conduct interviews. It makes business sense in many situations to narrow down the requirements to save on resources. Why receive 500 applicants from all universities and narrow that down to 50 for interview when you could receive 100 applicants from 5 universities and narrow that down to 25 interviews. Simplistic example I know, but that is why it is done. I'm not saying it's a great system, but it is an efficient one.
    just because league tables exist for universities does not mean people in lower down unis know **** all about their course... again, if you have a job on offer, you advertise to people who are able to do it... not just elites...

    again youre giving the same reasoning as asking for a 1st for a mediocre job... why have 500 people compete to do deskwork when you can say "only people with a 90% 1st can apply" and sift it down to 25...?

    its all bullcrap...
    • 39 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Something little known is that the term meritocracy was originally coined by Michael Young, founder of the Open University, as a pejorative. He wrote a dystopian satire called The Rise of The Meritocracy wherein the term had a meaning something like today's 'credentialism'. That was backfiring, then.

    I mention this anyway because I think a runaway credentialism is in some industries doing more harm than good and is maintained largely for gatekeeping purposes that serve the interests of those inside the gates more than those affected by their work.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: May 6, 2012
New on TSR

Find out what year 11 is like

Going into year 11? Students who did it last year share what to expect.

Article updates
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.