The Metropolitan Police Force in London, UK has come under a lot of fire of late because of racism in the force. One particular senior chief commissioner was over looked for promotion on what he claims is at least 3 times. Now I sympathise with anyone being overlooked in any form of promotion, and when this has happened to me I have simply left the company and gone elsewhere.
This particular police commissioner was from an ethnic minority. He, I sincerely hope so, was employed on his merits not because the Metropolitan Police had ethnic quotas to fill to keep the the Equalities Boards happy.
But because of this problem surely then that highlights (a) there is racism in the police force as there are in all walks of life (b) that meeting ethnic minority quotas doesnt actually work, that racial equality in the police force isnt working, so it should be abandoned for something that did/does.
lawbag (83.104.27.178)
11th Sep, 2008 15:59 (local)
These quotas only seem to apply in the public sector, which seems to suggest that in the business world and private sectors, ethnic minorities are either subject to extreme levels of racism, or that in the capitalist market economy, white-skinned employees do much better than their counterparts.
Going back to the police force analogy, the reasoning behind having black police officers policing the black community was that they understood the community and would relate to victims and deter criminals. Well, if London is any example to go by, it doesnt work, didnt work, and never will work. And if doesnt work in the police force, it wont work in other areas of industry.
Positive Discrimination is a win-win situation for its intended targets, because if you dont get the job, you can enable the right to be given the job, and if you do get the job, then you win again.
Going back to the police force analogy, the reasoning behind having black police officers policing the black community was that they understood the community and would relate to victims and deter criminals. Well, if London is any example to go by, it doesnt work, didnt work, and never will work. And if doesnt work in the police force, it wont work in other areas of industry.
Positive Discrimination is a win-win situation for its intended targets, because if you dont get the job, you can enable the right to be given the job, and if you do get the job, then you win again.
evilref (86.43.69.175)
11th Sep, 2008 16:09 (local)
It's not the reasoning I would use. The reasoning I would use is that policing (and government in general) can only really function with the consent of the policed (governed).
That is the reason why it is referred to as "a jury of your peers". Government is us. Or should be, anyway.
If whole communities are not capable or not prepared to be involved in law enforcement, that suggests a much deeper and more fundamental breakdown than mere "positive discrimination". It suggests whole communities who have no respect for or participation in the legal system.
I'm not saying that isn't happening in the UK -- I rather suspect it is, although that discussion is probably far more controversial.
That is the reason why it is referred to as "a jury of your peers". Government is us. Or should be, anyway.
If whole communities are not capable or not prepared to be involved in law enforcement, that suggests a much deeper and more fundamental breakdown than mere "positive discrimination". It suggests whole communities who have no respect for or participation in the legal system.
I'm not saying that isn't happening in the UK -- I rather suspect it is, although that discussion is probably far more controversial.
I suspect that police forces might be one of the few exceptions: if the public don't perceive the police as being people like them, members of their community, then it makes the "us and them" situation far worse.
Beyond that, I'm not sure I can offer a solution. I'm not even certain that this effect is significant, given the growing alienation between police and policed in the UK.