You're viewing a single thread.
I mostly like DEI. But I'm concerned that it is running cover for corporations. DEI is not about expanding opportunities to people evenly. DEI is about expanding opportunities to people that make the company more money. DEI alone is not enough for a fair and equitable society.
It isn't, but it sure is an improvement
How isn't it? The company I'm working for is touting it as them being so progressive. Meanwhile, they're only making changes that make them more money. None of the changes they're making is adding any risk.
That's what I mean - only doing DEI things only when there is a profit motive isn't ideal, but it's better than not doing DEI at all.
In an ideal world, doing the right thing would either always be the profitable thing to do (either because customers are smart, or because laws punish you if you don't), or companies would do the right thing regardless of profit simply because it's the right thing, but clearly we don't live in an ideal world.
I never implied that DEI was worse than no DEI. In fact I said I mostly liked it. Also only doing DEI when there is profit is the definition of DEI to companies. Companies are not doing DEI because it's the right thing to do. They're doing it because it makes them the money that they've left on the table by being racist, sexist, or whatever.
I've talked to the DEI consultant. "If being equitable loses money, then don't do it."