NO. Hiring should be based on merit alone….the best person for the job should fill the job. When that is done, everyone benefits.
MoJoOctober 15, 2020 - 12:11 PM - 12:11 PM
Affirmative action all over again? Big NO! We dealt with this nonsense back in the 80’s. Hire based on performance and necessary skills, not skin color, religious beliefs, sexual orientation or any other factors. The reparations, I’m woke BS needs to stop now.
BobOctober 15, 2020 - 12:11 PM - 12:11 PM
Sure, what could possibly be bad about legalized discrimination?
AshOctober 15, 2020 - 2:52 PM - 2:52 PM
AMEN!!
God bless
Wage SlaveOctober 15, 2020 - 5:33 PM - 5:33 PM
Even the framing of the prop on the ballot is a lie. They state it is to allow the state to take “diversity” into account for hiring. In reality, they are repealing ENTIRELY prop 209 passed in ’96 that “prohibit state governmental institutions from considering race, sex, or ethnicity, specifically in the areas of public employment, public contracting, and public education.”
Voting yes on this proposition legalizes discrimination by the state, period. Just because they say they will use it for a (debatable) good end, doesn’t mean squat. When has government ever not abused power we grant it? They will use government resources to cater to preferred voting blocks and punish political enemies. It will literally legalize Jim Crow for the state government. You are just taking their word for it that they wont abuse it.
DawgOctober 15, 2020 - 12:12 PM - 12:12 PM
I don’t plan to vote on anything, because I already voted.
No. I have never been a fan of racial discrimination.
If companies don’t hire the best person for the job, the product or service suffers. Newsom’s idea of enforced discrimination in corporate boards of directors is a formula for failure. Diversity without excellence is a failure. When people of all colors or orientations work at being the best they can be, the diversity will take care of itself.
Exit 12AOctober 15, 2020 - 12:19 PM - 12:19 PM
.
NO.
.
‘should be based only on qualifications.
Basing on color or ethnicity is RACIAL DISCRIMINATION.
Hire the BEST PERSON/ MOST QUALIFIED for the job.
“Diversity” …. MY A$$.
The ProfessorOctober 15, 2020 - 12:35 PM - 12:35 PM
This proposition is an absolute NO for me.
The hypocricy of the left knows no bounds. It’s right there in the “Pro” section.
“Prop 16 expands equal opportunity for all Californians…fights systematic racism…” Can someone please explain to me how codifying systematic racism fights systematic racism? Either systematic racism is good, or it is not.
Only a true racist, sexist, or xenophobe would think that this Pandora’s Box is a good idea.
No. As many of us have done, work hard and earn the position.
AlanOctober 15, 2020 - 12:59 PM - 12:59 PM
yes I did!
AshOctober 15, 2020 - 2:51 PM - 2:51 PM
do you believe that non-whites are victims? then everyone should have an equal chance to do there best and winner gets the job. otherwise it becomes socialism, corrupt and a failure.
FPNOctober 15, 2020 - 12:59 PM - 12:59 PM
No
SteveOctober 15, 2020 - 1:04 PM - 1:04 PM
2 people apply for a government job. Their qualifications and suitability are equal, Why not consider diversity in the workplace as a factor?
MitchOctober 15, 2020 - 1:49 PM - 1:49 PM
Because that isn’t how it will work.
The path to hell is paved with good intentions.
Exit 12AOctober 15, 2020 - 1:50 PM - 1:50 PM
.
Because it is discriminatory.
.
Let me paraphrase: “Judge by content of character (qualification), not by the color of skin.”
.
tashajOctober 15, 2020 - 2:38 PM - 2:38 PM
You must be a theoretical physicist, since they are the only ones considering the problems of which of the round dogs on a frictionless surface will win the race.
In reality, there is never a situation when qualifications and suitability of two candidates are exactly the same. Never-ever. And usually the “diversity” factor is brought up to push for hiring a less qualified/less suitable candidate.
Two people apply for a government job. Their qualifications and suitability are equal. Why not consider breast size as a factor?
Discrimination is discrimination. There is no place for it.
Rollo TomasiOctober 15, 2020 - 3:17 PM - 3:17 PM
If 2 people apply for a government job and their qualifications and suitability are equal, further consideration based on immutable characteristics is discriminatory.
DarwinOctober 15, 2020 - 1:04 PM - 1:04 PM
It’s been happening since affirmative action. It’s just not on paper. Just look at Kaisers management. J
The add I saw last night indicated Pro funding from Kaiser….Hmmm.
KTOctober 15, 2020 - 1:12 PM - 1:12 PM
I highly believe that someone should be hired on qualifications and not by the color of their skin. I once worked for a software company and when I got back from vacation and I got fired for what my coworker, who was Black, did when I wasn’t even there. I was told by my manager that it was safer to fire me and not my coworker because then the company would be looking at a lawsuit. I was young and I didn’t know that I could have filed a lawsuit for being wrongfully fired.
CalmomOctober 15, 2020 - 1:13 PM - 1:13 PM
ABSOLUTELY NO
ToekneeOctober 15, 2020 - 1:23 PM - 1:23 PM
It’s like picking a Vice President, not based on merits, trust, qualities, accomplishments or qualifications required for the job. One just cannot wear enough kente cloth to pander for votes.
I vote NO.
Original GOctober 15, 2020 - 1:27 PM - 1:27 PM
How did this insanity even make it onto the ballot ?
Then again voters elected a person to a high position of trust who LIED about being Native American and her political party allowed her to represent them as a presidential candidate/
Speaks volumes about that party.
Oh, pleaseOctober 15, 2020 - 8:53 PM - 8:53 PM
Liberals pandering for votes. That’s how.
TugboatOctober 15, 2020 - 1:31 PM - 1:31 PM
A big NO.
TugboatOctober 15, 2020 - 1:33 PM - 1:33 PM
A big NO
DavidOctober 15, 2020 - 2:04 PM - 2:04 PM
Walk into a local post office or DMV office and note the diversity of employees.
Discrimination is not an issue in Government employment. Rules are already in place. This is a con job that will open opportunities for discrimination.
Vote NO..
Damon KentOctober 15, 2020 - 2:28 PM - 2:28 PM
YES SIR! TRUMP 2020
AshOctober 15, 2020 - 2:48 PM - 2:48 PM
AMEN!
make lefties heads explode again for another 8 years!
ERasOctober 15, 2020 - 7:41 PM - 7:41 PM
8??? Um Ash… think you mean 4…
AshOctober 15, 2020 - 2:48 PM - 2:48 PM
anything put on by the legislature has to be corrupt, so HELL NO!
KrisOctober 15, 2020 - 2:53 PM - 2:53 PM
already voted no
Steven PowersOctober 15, 2020 - 3:31 PM - 3:31 PM
No
Did I Say That Out LoudOctober 15, 2020 - 3:40 PM - 3:40 PM
No.
MadelineOctober 15, 2020 - 3:44 PM - 3:44 PM
No on 16. It’s affirmative action all over again. It stunk then, and it stinks now.
GititogetherOctober 15, 2020 - 4:16 PM - 4:16 PM
Wasn’t this the basis for nazism?
bdmlOctober 15, 2020 - 4:44 PM - 4:44 PM
NO NO NO it is racism
LedOctober 15, 2020 - 4:47 PM - 4:47 PM
Nope. Equality under the law, equal treatment by our government. As basic as it gets.
Even if you’re tempted by the reasoning for it, just consider how hopelessly divided we will be if this kind of thing takes hold. State-defined tribalism gets a hard pass from me.
No on 16. California is diverse, and doesn’t need this. It would make more sense in a state that lacks diversity, where they’re concerned the workforce would be all white, etc.
As far as women, women are easily out earning men these days. This isn’t the 50s.
AnoOctober 15, 2020 - 7:29 PM - 7:29 PM
You are very wrong . Women still make on average 80 cents per $1 every man makes .
Aside from your grossly negligent statement , this is a hard NO on prop 16.
For the love of God can we please stop with all the race craziness.
Rollo TomasiOctober 16, 2020 - 10:13 AM - 10:13 AM
Ano, please tell me you’re not still relying on a long ago debunked myth.
Women can easily earn as much as men if they ASK for more. People aren’t paid what they’re worth. They’re paid what they NEGOTIATE. Men are likely to ask for more if for no other reason, most men have wives and children to support. Ask and you shall RECEIVE.
Hell no. Discrimination is discrimination. The recent wave of white guilt the country is riding is a huge overreaction to problems that absolutely exist, but would be better remedied with more subtle solutions.
Concord74October 16, 2020 - 8:20 AM - 8:20 AM
“C-Little”: white guilt is not a factor as the funding and support by the likes of George Soros, Zuckenberg, CEO of Google, Gates,etc. Big money buys a lot of looters and protestors.
snappy97October 15, 2020 - 5:52 PM - 5:52 PM
I voted No. We don’t need affirmative action.
ClayDenOctober 15, 2020 - 8:02 PM - 8:02 PM
As long as they apply it to all jobs, including the NBA and the NFL.
Lost PrideOctober 15, 2020 - 8:02 PM - 8:02 PM
NO!!!!
ConcordDadOctober 15, 2020 - 8:34 PM - 8:34 PM
I don’t think Race, Sex or any of that should even be on an application. Just put the experience you have and that’s it. May the best candidate get the job.
I’m not a Conservative or a Liberal and I voted NO
The WizardOctober 15, 2020 - 8:44 PM - 8:44 PM
No !
WinstonOctober 15, 2020 - 9:52 PM - 9:52 PM
Prop 16 is super racist. The government should treat people equally, not put the finger on the scale to “help” the people the government deems inferior.
jjshawkOctober 15, 2020 - 10:19 PM - 10:19 PM
Voting No! There’s already plenty of diversity, just take a look around. In the of “fairness” job markets, both public and private sectors, need to focus on being merit-based.
Concord74October 16, 2020 - 8:22 AM - 8:22 AM
KAISER
redrazorOctober 16, 2020 - 11:26 AM - 11:26 AM
Speaking of TV ads ……. am I the only one who’s noticed that (almost) every single TV ad from laundry detergent to automobiles to health products has at least 20 to 90% minority actors.(people of color)?!?? I’d say that there’s already way more diversity in most multi-media formats than could every have been imagined 5 years ago. I voted NO on Prop. 16.
JessicaOctober 16, 2020 - 12:05 PM - 12:05 PM
This question was posed SOLELY to bait an argument.
It has been proven TIME AND TIME AGAIN in a number of studies that people are discriminated against on ethnic-sounding names ALONE. Much MORE when they are seen.
There was a study several years back in which identical applications were submitted to colleges with only the names changed and the acceptance rate was far higher for those with “white” sounding names than those with non-white sounding names.
It’s a no-brainer to encourage hiring based on diversity because when it comes to minorities “merit-alone” means that if an equally qualified white person applies, you’re less likely to be the chosen one.
Is that why Mike Huckabee didn’t get elected president?
If you own a company, and want your product or service to be the best it can be, you hire on merit alone. If you hire based on a race or sex quota, the product or service will suffer.
67 comments
NO. Hiring should be based on merit alone….the best person for the job should fill the job. When that is done, everyone benefits.
Affirmative action all over again? Big NO! We dealt with this nonsense back in the 80’s. Hire based on performance and necessary skills, not skin color, religious beliefs, sexual orientation or any other factors. The reparations, I’m woke BS needs to stop now.
Sure, what could possibly be bad about legalized discrimination?
AMEN!!
God bless
Even the framing of the prop on the ballot is a lie. They state it is to allow the state to take “diversity” into account for hiring. In reality, they are repealing ENTIRELY prop 209 passed in ’96 that “prohibit state governmental institutions from considering race, sex, or ethnicity, specifically in the areas of public employment, public contracting, and public education.”
Voting yes on this proposition legalizes discrimination by the state, period. Just because they say they will use it for a (debatable) good end, doesn’t mean squat. When has government ever not abused power we grant it? They will use government resources to cater to preferred voting blocks and punish political enemies. It will literally legalize Jim Crow for the state government. You are just taking their word for it that they wont abuse it.
I don’t plan to vote on anything, because I already voted.
Quotas over merit? Don’t think so.
No. I have never been a fan of racial discrimination.
If companies don’t hire the best person for the job, the product or service suffers. Newsom’s idea of enforced discrimination in corporate boards of directors is a formula for failure. Diversity without excellence is a failure. When people of all colors or orientations work at being the best they can be, the diversity will take care of itself.
.
NO.
.
‘should be based only on qualifications.
Basing on color or ethnicity is RACIAL DISCRIMINATION.
Absolutely NO.
NO on 16
I voted no.
Hire the BEST PERSON/ MOST QUALIFIED for the job.
“Diversity” …. MY A$$.
This proposition is an absolute NO for me.
The hypocricy of the left knows no bounds. It’s right there in the “Pro” section.
“Prop 16 expands equal opportunity for all Californians…fights systematic racism…” Can someone please explain to me how codifying systematic racism fights systematic racism? Either systematic racism is good, or it is not.
Only a true racist, sexist, or xenophobe would think that this Pandora’s Box is a good idea.
A BIG FAT NO
Hire based on merit only, never on quotas.
A big NO for me!
Big fat NO!
No. As many of us have done, work hard and earn the position.
yes I did!
do you believe that non-whites are victims? then everyone should have an equal chance to do there best and winner gets the job. otherwise it becomes socialism, corrupt and a failure.
No
2 people apply for a government job. Their qualifications and suitability are equal, Why not consider diversity in the workplace as a factor?
Because that isn’t how it will work.
The path to hell is paved with good intentions.
.
Because it is discriminatory.
.
Let me paraphrase: “Judge by content of character (qualification), not by the color of skin.”
.
You must be a theoretical physicist, since they are the only ones considering the problems of which of the round dogs on a frictionless surface will win the race.
In reality, there is never a situation when qualifications and suitability of two candidates are exactly the same. Never-ever. And usually the “diversity” factor is brought up to push for hiring a less qualified/less suitable candidate.
Two people apply for a government job. Their qualifications and suitability are equal. Why not consider breast size as a factor?
Discrimination is discrimination. There is no place for it.
If 2 people apply for a government job and their qualifications and suitability are equal, further consideration based on immutable characteristics is discriminatory.
It’s been happening since affirmative action. It’s just not on paper. Just look at Kaisers management. J
The add I saw last night indicated Pro funding from Kaiser….Hmmm.
I highly believe that someone should be hired on qualifications and not by the color of their skin. I once worked for a software company and when I got back from vacation and I got fired for what my coworker, who was Black, did when I wasn’t even there. I was told by my manager that it was safer to fire me and not my coworker because then the company would be looking at a lawsuit. I was young and I didn’t know that I could have filed a lawsuit for being wrongfully fired.
ABSOLUTELY NO
It’s like picking a Vice President, not based on merits, trust, qualities, accomplishments or qualifications required for the job. One just cannot wear enough kente cloth to pander for votes.
I vote NO.
How did this insanity even make it onto the ballot ?
Then again voters elected a person to a high position of trust who LIED about being Native American and her political party allowed her to represent them as a presidential candidate/
Speaks volumes about that party.
Liberals pandering for votes. That’s how.
A big NO.
A big NO
Walk into a local post office or DMV office and note the diversity of employees.
Discrimination is not an issue in Government employment. Rules are already in place. This is a con job that will open opportunities for discrimination.
Vote NO..
YES SIR! TRUMP 2020
AMEN!
make lefties heads explode again for another 8 years!
8??? Um Ash… think you mean 4…
anything put on by the legislature has to be corrupt, so HELL NO!
already voted no
No
No.
No on 16. It’s affirmative action all over again. It stunk then, and it stinks now.
Wasn’t this the basis for nazism?
NO NO NO it is racism
Nope. Equality under the law, equal treatment by our government. As basic as it gets.
Even if you’re tempted by the reasoning for it, just consider how hopelessly divided we will be if this kind of thing takes hold. State-defined tribalism gets a hard pass from me.
No on 16. California is diverse, and doesn’t need this. It would make more sense in a state that lacks diversity, where they’re concerned the workforce would be all white, etc.
As far as women, women are easily out earning men these days. This isn’t the 50s.
You are very wrong . Women still make on average 80 cents per $1 every man makes .
Aside from your grossly negligent statement , this is a hard NO on prop 16.
For the love of God can we please stop with all the race craziness.
Ano, please tell me you’re not still relying on a long ago debunked myth.
https://fee.org/articles/harvard-study-gender-pay-gap-explained-entirely-by-work-choices-of-men-and-women/
Women can easily earn as much as men if they ASK for more. People aren’t paid what they’re worth. They’re paid what they NEGOTIATE. Men are likely to ask for more if for no other reason, most men have wives and children to support. Ask and you shall RECEIVE.
NO!!
Hell no. Discrimination is discrimination. The recent wave of white guilt the country is riding is a huge overreaction to problems that absolutely exist, but would be better remedied with more subtle solutions.
“C-Little”: white guilt is not a factor as the funding and support by the likes of George Soros, Zuckenberg, CEO of Google, Gates,etc. Big money buys a lot of looters and protestors.
I voted No. We don’t need affirmative action.
As long as they apply it to all jobs, including the NBA and the NFL.
NO!!!!
I don’t think Race, Sex or any of that should even be on an application. Just put the experience you have and that’s it. May the best candidate get the job.
I’m not a Conservative or a Liberal and I voted NO
No !
Prop 16 is super racist. The government should treat people equally, not put the finger on the scale to “help” the people the government deems inferior.
Voting No! There’s already plenty of diversity, just take a look around. In the of “fairness” job markets, both public and private sectors, need to focus on being merit-based.
KAISER
Speaking of TV ads ……. am I the only one who’s noticed that (almost) every single TV ad from laundry detergent to automobiles to health products has at least 20 to 90% minority actors.(people of color)?!?? I’d say that there’s already way more diversity in most multi-media formats than could every have been imagined 5 years ago. I voted NO on Prop. 16.
This question was posed SOLELY to bait an argument.
It has been proven TIME AND TIME AGAIN in a number of studies that people are discriminated against on ethnic-sounding names ALONE. Much MORE when they are seen.
There was a study several years back in which identical applications were submitted to colleges with only the names changed and the acceptance rate was far higher for those with “white” sounding names than those with non-white sounding names.
It’s a no-brainer to encourage hiring based on diversity because when it comes to minorities “merit-alone” means that if an equally qualified white person applies, you’re less likely to be the chosen one.
So now it’s a name problem?
Is that why Mike Huckabee didn’t get elected president?
If you own a company, and want your product or service to be the best it can be, you hire on merit alone. If you hire based on a race or sex quota, the product or service will suffer.
Comments are closed.