[Lions-l] correct political paradox

[Curly Harman]

As a veteran of 35 years as a Human Resources Executive ( aka Personnel)
here's some info for all to consider.  The original question on employers
questionnaire's shows the intent of discovery at the onset of Racial data
collection.   We were all taught to remember the key categories by the easy
tickler C-O-I-N-S.......Caucasian, Oriental, Indian (India), Negro, Spanish
(of non-American descent).  "Political correctness" eventually took over and
COINS was replaced by a variety of descriptors.  When someone asked the
question, "what do I select if I am of mixed race?"  the instructions were
to select the one category you prefer most to be identified with.  The data
was used to calculate the population mix on the job compared to the
population mix of a specific region to detect if adverse impact was at play
i.e.....if the region consisted of 20% Negro and you only employed 10% Negro
..you were instructed by the law to make favorable changes to your hiring
practices to overcome this "adverse impact" on society.  All of this came
out of the Human Rights Act which originated in the 60's.
 
The term Spanish of non-American descent created a flap at times as you
might well imagine.   For example what would you call a Negro from Spain or
a Caucasian from Africa as was posed in the earlier examples.  In Human
Resources they were counted as Negro and Caucasian unless they specifically
chose to be identified as Spanish and Negro which very rarely occurred.
 
One other interesting point was that the only true Americans...the American
Indian were not categorized or counted on any of the early employer reports
since they were all officially counted by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and
were not an employment concern since the treaties specific to each tribe
were what drove those issues.
 
Just provided as an FYI...not intended to nit-pick or debate other comments.
 
Bill "Curly" Harman
BHS 1962
Eatonton, GA 
 
-------Original Message-------
 
From: Richard Bull
Date: 6/12/2007 9:53:08 AM
To: The Baker Lions' Mailing List; lions-l at baker.hs.org
Subject: Re: [Lions-l] correct political paradox
 
The question does not address the "biology" of mixed "race" people very well
  It is intended more as a sociological definition or "Who / whom do you
identify yourself with?   As America continues to move forward, we can hope
that this nosey question is no longer  any part of the government's business
 
 
Richard Bull
1959
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: 
To: lions-l at baker.hs.org
Sent: 6/11/2007 11:51:08 PM 
Subject: Re: [Lions-l] correct political paradox


Hello George,
 
As the word race has a number of meanings,  it was perfectly legitimate for
the young lady to identify herself in either one of several different
categories (African, African American, Anglo, Kenyan (if she came from
Kenya), White, etc.).  Check the meaning of race in the dictionary.  If you
are filling in a blank on a questionnaire, without knowing what alternatives
you are to choose from, you cannot be faulted for writing in something that
might be unexpected.  Race does not necessarily identify the color of one's
skin.  It might indicate your national origin (American), the continent of
your ancestors (Asian, European), the geographic origin of your ancestors
(Eskimos), etc.  People preparing questionnaires should be aware of the
different meanings of the word race and not ask such open-ended questions. 
Nevertheless, I suspect the young lady was perhaps making a political
statement indicating that her sympathies lie with b! lack people whose
origins were in Africa.  And she should have known that the questionnaire
was probably just trying to identify the color of her skin.
 
Hope you don't think this is just nit-picking.
 
Willis Trawick '56
Sutherland Springs, Tx.






See what's free at AOL.com. 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://baker.hs.org/pipermail/lions-l/attachments/20070612/5cb6da13/attachment.html