kilroy69

They could have their pick of Penix, Nix or Rattler at 27 and a top flight WR corps with Harrison and McClauren

I think the commanders are going to take Harrison Jr 2nd, and then trade their 2 seconds to the lions to jump back up into the first and take Pennix

It goes beyond HR not being your friend. They are and actively biased good ol girls club and NO ONE talks about it. You hear shitt all the time about how women are paid less than men. How they get lowballed in salary. How hard it is for women . Then you realize that almost ALL of HR is made up of women. So it is women focking over women and then complaining about it like they are somehow not to blame.

They found that HR as a whole is biased in many different ways. They gave lots of stats. Then they left out of the entire article that HR is made up of 80+ percent women. We see a diversity push for fairness and equality but the people who do the hiring literally do not practice what they preach in any way, shape or form. The best part is that if you mention the 80/20 split in HR instead of people scratching their heads and saying "yea, that does seem to be a pretty wide split" what you get are accusations of sexisim. If a group of men controlled 80 percent of a function that you are REQUIRED to interact with to get your job, was a good ol boys club, did not let women in the group, and had a demonstrated problem with bias the world would melt down. Because it is women we allow it? A group of economists recently performed an experiment on around 100 of the largest companies in the country, applying for jobs using made-up résumés with equivalent qualifications but different personal characteristics. They changed applicants’ names to suggest that they were white or Black, and male or female — Latisha or Amy, Lamar or Adam. On Monday, they released the names of the companies. On average, they found, employers contacted the presumed white applicants 9.5 percent more often than the presumed Black applicants. Yet this practice varied significantly by firm and industry. One-fifth of the companies — many of them retailers or car dealers — were responsible for nearly half of the gap in callbacks to white and Black applicants. Two companies favored white applicants over Black applicants significantly more than others. They were AutoNation, a used car retailer, which contacted presumed white applicants 43 percent more often, and Genuine Parts Company, which sells auto parts including under the NAPA brand, and called presumed white candidates 33 percent more often. In a statement, Heather Ross, a spokeswoman for Genuine Parts, said, “We are always evaluating our practices to ensure inclusivity and break down barriers, and we will continue to do so.” AutoNation did not respond to a request for comment. Companies With the Largest and Smallest Racial Contact Gaps Of the 97 companies in the experiment, two stood out as contacting presumed white job applicants significantly more often than presumed Black ones. At 14 companies, there was little or no difference in how often they called back the presumed white or Black applicants. Companies where the racial gap was the largest Companies where the racial gap was the smallest Source: Patrick Kline, Evan K. Rose and Christopher R. Walters Known as an audit study, the experiment was the largest of its kind in the United States: The researchers sent 80,000 résumés to 10,000 jobs from 2019 to 2021. The results demonstrate how entrenched employment discrimination is in parts of the U.S. labor market — and the extent to which Black workers start behind in certain industries. “I am not in the least bit surprised,” said Daiquiri Steele, an assistant professor at the University of Alabama School of Law who previously worked for the Department of Labor on employment discrimination. “If you’re having trouble breaking in, the biggest issue is the ripple effect it has. It affects your wages and the economy of your community going forward.” Some companies showed no difference in how they treated applications from people assumed to be white or Black. Their human resources practices — and one policy in particular (more on that later) — offer guidance for how companies can avoid biased decisions in the hiring process. Editors’ Picks A lack of racial bias was more common in certain industries: food stores, including Kroger; food products, including Mondelez; freight and transport, including FedEx and Ryder; and wholesale, including Sysco and McLane Company. “We want to bring people’s attention not only to the fact that racism is real, sexism is real, some are discriminating, but also that it’s possible to do better, and there’s something to be learned from those that have been doing a good job,” said Patrick Kline, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley, who conducted the study with Evan K. Rose at the University of Chicago and Christopher R. Walters at Berkeley. The researchers first published details of their experiment in 2021, but without naming the companies. The new paper, which is set to run in the American Economic Review, names the companies and explains the methodology developed to group them by their performance, while accounting for statistical noise. Sample Résumés From the Experiment Fictitious résumés sent to large U.S. companies revealed a preference, on average, for candidates whose names suggested that they were white. Résumés with distinctively white names “Todd” “Allison” Résumés with distinctively Black names “Lakisha” “Leroy” To assign names, the researchers started with a prior list that had been assembled using Massachusetts birth certificates from 1974 to 1979. They then supplemented this list with names found in a database of speeding tickets issued in North Carolina between 2006 and 2018, classifying a name as “distinctive” if more than 90 percent of people with that name were of a particular race. Source: Patrick Kline, Evan K. Rose and Christopher R. Walters What Researchers Discovered When They Sent 80,000 Fake Résumés to U.S. Jobs - The New York Times The study includes 97 firms. The jobs the researchers applied to were entry level, not requiring a college degree or substantial work experience. In addition to race and gender, the researchers tested other characteristics protected by law, like age and sexual orientation. They sent up to 1,000 applications to each company, applying for as many as 125 jobs per company in locations nationwide, to try to uncover patterns in companies’ operations versus isolated instances. Then they tracked whether the employer contacted the applicant within 30 days. A bias against Black names Companies requiring lots of interaction with customers, like sales and retail, particularly in the auto sector, were most likely to show a preference for applicants presumed to be white. This was true even when applying for positions at those firms that didn’t involve customer interaction, suggesting that discriminatory practices were baked in to corporate culture or H.R. practices, the researchers said. Still, there were exceptions — some of the companies exhibiting the least bias were retailers, like Lowe’s and Target. The study may underestimate the rate of discrimination against Black applicants in the labor market as a whole because it tested large companies, which tend to discriminate less, said Lincoln Quillian, a sociologist at Northwestern who analyzes audit studies. It did not include names intended to represent Latino or Asian American applicants, but other research suggests that they are also contacted less than white applicants, though they face less discrimination than Black applicants. The experiment ended in 2021, and some of the companies involved might have changed their practices since. Still, a review of all available audit studies found that discrimination against Black applicants had not changed in three decades. After the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, such discrimination was found to have disappeared among certain employers, but the researchers behind that study said the effect was most likely short-lived. Gender, age and L.G.B.T.Q. status On average, companies did not treat male and female applicants differently. This aligns with other research showing that gender discrimination against women is rare in entry-level jobs, and starts later in careers. However, when companies did favor men (especially in manufacturing) or women (mostly at apparel stores), the biases were much larger than for race. Builders FirstSource contacted presumed male applicants more than twice as often as female ones. Ascena, which owns brands like Ann Taylor, contacted women 66 percent more than men. Neither company responded to requests for comment. The consequences of being female differed by race. The differences were small, but being female was a slight benefit for white applicants, and a slight penalty for Black applicants. The researchers also tested several other characteristics protected by law, with a smaller number of résumés. They found there was a small penalty for being over 40. Overall, they found no penalty for using nonbinary pronouns. Being gay, as indicated by including membership in an L.G.B.T.Q. club on the résumé, resulted in a slight penalty for white applicants, but benefited Black applicants — although the effect was small, when this was on their résumés, the racial penalty disappeared. Under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, discrimination is illegal even if it’s unintentional. Yet in the real world, it is difficult for job applicants to know why they did not hear back from a company. “These practices are particularly challenging to address because applicants often do not know whether they are being discriminated against in the hiring process,” Brandalyn Bickner, a spokeswoman for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, said in a statement. (It has seen the data and spoken with the researchers, though it could not use an academic study as the basis for an investigation, she said.) What companies can do to reduce discrimination Several common measures — like employing a chief diversity officer, offering diversity training or having a diverse board — were not correlated with decreased discrimination in entry-level hiring, the researchers found. But one thing strongly predicted less discrimination: a centralized H.R. operation. The researchers recorded the voice mail messages that the fake applicants received. When a company’s calls came from fewer individual phone numbers, suggesting that they were originating from a central office, there tended to be less bias. When they came from individual hiring managers at local stores or warehouses, there was more. These messages often sounded frantic and informal, asking if an applicant could start the next day, for example. “That’s when implicit biases kick in,” Professor Kline said. A more formalized hiring process helps overcome this, he said: “Just thinking about things, which steps to take, having to run something by someone for approval, can be quite important in mitigating bias.” At Sysco, a wholesale restaurant food distributor, which showed no racial bias in the study, a centralized recruitment team reviews résumés and decides whom to call. “Consistency in how we review candidates, with a focus on the requirements of the position, is key,” said Ron Phillips, Sysco’s chief human resources officer. “It lessens the opportunity for personal viewpoints to rise in the process.” Another important factor is diversity among the people hiring, said Paula Hubbard, the chief human resources officer at McLane Company. It procures, stores and delivers products for large chains like Walmart, and showed no racial bias in the study. Around 40 percent of the company’s recruiters are people of color, and 60 percent are women. Diversifying the pool of people who apply also helps, H.R. officials said. McLane goes to events for women in trucking and puts up billboards in Spanish. So does hiring based on skills, versus degrees. While McLane used to require a college degree for many roles, it changed that practice after determining that specific skills mattered more for warehousing or driving jobs. “We now do that for all our jobs: Is there truly a degree required?” Ms. Hubbard said. “Why? Does it make sense? Is experience enough?” Hilton, another company that showed no racial bias in the study, also stopped requiring degrees for many jobs, in 2018. Another factor associated with less bias in hiring, the new study found, was more regulatory scrutiny — like at federal contractors, or companies with more Labor Department citations. Finally, more profitable companies were less biased, in line with a long-held economics theory by the Nobel Prize winner Gary Becker that discrimination is bad for business. Economists said that could be because the more profitable companies benefit from a more diverse set of employees. Or it could be an indication that they had more efficient business processes, in H.R. and elsewhere.

It was always McNair.

YOU are NPR's prized demographic and part of their echo chamber. Of course you like it. You literally just gave a glossy overview of THE BEST things about NPR radio. The fact they DO in fact include NON political things mixed in. The rest is liberal nonsense that you likely agree with so you leave it out. When was the last time you hear a conservative/republican voice on NPR? You likely can not remember because their intention is not to be impartial. Their intention is to be a more high brow version of Fox and then they deny that fact. MSNBC, FOX, NPR, are all the same thing. Mouthpieces for their parties.

That kinda stuff is cool. I appreciate that. They used to have really cool programming like that all the time. I 100 percent support that.

Ok so they have a website that has a little more than that. That is not representive of what their on air programming is. That is ALL their stories are about. Shocker. You can not stand anyone question the nonstop stories about just those groups without jumping to wild assumptions. Your tiny little brain can not imagine an instance where there is a world that someone is not in lockstep with the democratic platform and are ALSO not a MAGAturd. In your tiny brain it has to be one or the other. That I have to be a misogynists, homophobe or racist if I do not want to hear about ONLY that for their on air programming. Your echo chamber has you believing nonsense. I might vote trump just to help see liberals lose their focking minds Would be the first republican candidate I have ever voted for. Also...deep down you know the dark truth. Trump and everything you hate about him was created by the DNC. They derailed Bernie who would have focking smoked Trump so they could run an unpopular Hillary. Because they owed her. It did not matter that there was a clear dislike for her. The DNC knew best. They were HAPPY when Trump became the nominee. He was going to be a piece of cake. No way he was going to stand up to the political machine the clintons had. They got JUST what they planned on and whiffed. So if you want to be mad about MAGA even being a thing.....call the DNC. They created him. It is like opening pandoras box and then complaining about the asssholes that let lose all the annoying things inside. Imagine. Bernie being able to appoint all those justices.

I have ZERO problem with NPR being funded. None. You literally can not find a single non liberal voice anywhere on NPR. When a republican actually does come on and talks the interviewers are hostile and do not even try to hide their contempt. Keep npr. Just make it less of a liberal echo chamber and let's hear an actual diversity of voices. The ONLY stories you hear about on NPR are about minorities, women and LGBTRQ.....oh and fuckk trump. That is it. That is all.

They have been trash for years man. I grew up listening to NPR. I loved their programming like car talk, APHC, and Science friday. They used to do a piece where they had someone tell their story and it was added to the library of congress. In the last 20 or so years the programming has went from being informative and light hearted to basically becoming a media arm of the DNC. I find myself tuning in randomly and feel like I have Stockholm Syndrome. I do not want to listen but at this point I identify with my captors. I am not kidding you I heard a story the other day on NPR about how the direct care industry is lobbying for more immigrants to be allowed to be caregivers. The reason is that "no Americans want to do the job." Instead of taking the CEO to task about the fact that the industry pays absolute the NPR talking head just allowed this guy to spew on about nonsense that we all know is bullcrap. If you paid 20 bucks an hour they would not have a problem getting people to work. They want to use the immigrant system because they can pay them min wage(or less), work them 80 hours a week and keep them in a state of indentured servitude in perpetual low wages. No questions. Just basically air time to pitch his idea of fuckingg the american worker over by bringing in lower wage workers instead of being human and giving a living wage.

I know a girl that was fat and pretty ugly. She had self esteem issues and tried to kill herself multiple times. The last time they admitted her to the hospital she came out claiming she was a boy and was always a boy. She changed her name. Started pretending to be a boy. Started taking Ozempic, lost like 90lbs, died her hair and suddenly she is no longer a he.

Another of my favorites is Jimmy Carr. I am not sure if I mentioned that but watching him do crowd work is amazing. Especially if someone heckles. He is brutal.

I am taking my son and his bestie to the toledo zoo. were just going to make a day of it. See the animals and the eclipse.

I 100 percent do not believe that. Not even a little. DNA testing is cheap and easy and can save lives. Not being able to test for dna in a capitol murder case should be illegal. I am not arguing this guys innocence at all. He likely did it. a 3 dollar dna test could have proved that he didn't though. Which seems intentionally wrong.

I do not care when he requested it. It should have been done as a matter of course to make sure they were not killing an innocent person.