White British candidates have been temporarily blocked from applying for a job at one of the UK’s biggest police forces in its latest attempt to boost diversity. The Mail has more.
West Yorkshire Police (WYP) is preventing the budding PCs from submitting their application to join the police constable entry programme.
“Under-represented” groups are currently permitted to lodge their applications early, while applications from white Brits are “hidden”, former officers say.
Concerns have been raised about the potential unfair treatment of candidates, with suggestions of unlawful positive discrimination.
WYP has stated the policies are in place to make sure “diverse communities” are represented by the officers serving them, the Telegraph reports.
However, former members of the force have accused it of effectively running a “hidden” recruitment policy that targets certain groups.
A whistleblower who was heavily involved in sifting job applications for recruits claimed he raised concerns over the policy but was warned not to interfere.
He also said black and far east Asian candidates were considered among the particularly under-represented and given a “gold” ranking, whereas those of south-east Asian origin made it to the silver tier.
Meanwhile, “white others” – including candidates from Irish and eastern European backgrounds – were bronze.
A report to senior officers, seen by the Telegraph, said: “This feeds into a general theme where the pipeline for anyone white British is strangled, whilst anyone not white British is ushered through onto the next available stage.”
Earlier this year, a separate report suggested WYP – the fourth largest force in the country – spends more money on DEI than any other force, coming in at 19 diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI) staff at a cost of £1 million a year.
Recruits are required to go through a long process that includes an online assessment, an interview and physical tests. New constables – either in uniform or as plain-clothes detectives – receive a starting salary of just under £30,000.
WYP’s website states: “We are currently accepting applications for the two police constable entry programmes (uniform and detective) from people from our under-represented groups. … If you are not from one of these groups, please keep checking this page for future recruitment opportunities.”
The force says online applications from ethnic minority backgrounds are “processed through to interview stage, but then held until recruitment is opened for everyone”.
It adds: “Enabling people from an ethnic minority background to apply early does not give them an advantage in the application process, it simply provides us with more opportunity to attract talent from a pool of applicants who reflect the diverse communities we serve.”
According to a document with details of the policy, minority candidates were given months to register an interest and fill out applications while some white candidates were given as little as 48 hours.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Well done to Will Jones & the DS for highlighting this travesty.
I remember years ago reading an obscure news article revealing that the Bristol Police Force had actually rejected the applications of 125 white British men JUST FOR BEING WHITE, in order to meet “diversity quotas”.
Blatant Anti-White Racism promoted by our own government.
Blatant and iniquitous anti-white discrimination. Even before the last Presidential election, the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled against affirmative action in race-based college admissions.
Meanwhile in Britain the Three Progressive Little Monkeys of Government, Judiciary and Law-Enforcement blunder on, seeing, hearing, speaking and implementing their petty evils.
‘Positive discrimination’ is another term that really irritates me. It’s an oxymoron because how can there ever be anything positive about discriminating against certain people? Also, if there was full adherence and priority given to meritocracy then the term wouldn’t even be able to exist.
We are undeniably living in Clown World when the ethnicity ( or other personal characteristic ) of a candidate is given preference over other more meaningful attributes which makes them suitable for a role.
As ever it’s the big question of ‘who decides’ what’s positive and what isn’t, right now… we know these people bend with the wind, that’s why we have laws to give fair consistency to all
‘Positive discrimination’ is another term that really irritates me. It’s an oxymoron because how can there ever be anything positive about discriminating against certain people?
Discrimination (in this sense) always means prefer members of one group over members of some other group. It’s always both positive and negative, positive for the preferred group and negative for the other group. This means positive discrimination is a disingenuous term as it really means In favour of a group we like better than disadvantaged group.
Discriminate in favour of white (British) people — Bad, bad, bad!
Discriminate against white (British) people in favour of everyone else — Hooray for social justice!
We should perhaps all endeavour to emphasise every time the word “diversity” is used that it refers to a very limited kind of diversity- in this case racial diversity. If you choose any tiny criteria you will find disparity. Those with power have for a long time chosen a certain subset, for various reasons none of which seem sincere to me.
And why this constant emphasis on an organisation having to ‘reflect the community’? Where the heck is the logic or justification of such blatant twaddle?
Reflect the community only in certain respects as chosen by the powerful, in an attempt to divide and rule
Something noteworthy: I saw a picture of a bunch of binmen who were striking in Birmingham. All white. Now I’m not saying that non-white binmen don’t exist, but when you look at the demographics of that city i thought it interesting. If indeed white men make up the majority of binmen then that particular job cannot be said to be ‘reflecting the diverse community’, can it? Something tells me the authorities won’t be overly bothered about ‘positive discrimination’ for this particular role either.
Good spot!
Not many lasses either, of any skin colour…
Do you remember before wheelie bins, though, and we had those round reinforced rubber or metal jobbies? There must’ve been a lot of back injuries because the binmen had to physically pick heavy, full bins up and tip them into the back. It’s a piece of cake now in comparison because there’s basically no heavy lifting at all. It’s a bit like whoever thought to put wheels on a suitcase. Such a simple yet revolutionary idea.
That’s based on the notion that only random selection is fair selection. When people are selected randomly from some population, all identifiable subgroups this population is composed of will end up being selected in proportion to the percentage of the population their group makes up.
This is obviously BS because selecting from applicants for some job (or anything else) isn’t done randomly and because the applicants group self-selected in a non-random way. The subset of people who applied for police jobs is not a randomly selected subset of the group of all people who could have applied for such a job.
In theory over time these orgs should generally represent the wider local community, it’s the blatant exceeding of the percentage distribution through positive discrimination which I can’t abide. Don’t these people think how stupid it is to replace one ‘unjust’ position with another?
I strongly disagree. JXB puts it very well:
“There is no basis to assume that the proportion of different groups suitable/wanting to do police work should be the same in all groups, or that every minority group within a general population can or should be proportionately represented in a certain activity.”
You can seize upon whatever arbitrary way of categorising people that you wish, and apply to whatever activity you wish, and draw whatever conclusions you wish. I say that things are “out of proportion” because human life is not even, fair, symmetrical or anything else like it. Other people say “because racism” or “because *ism or *phobia”. It seems to be an unwinnable argument. I choose to think that all of this absurd focus should be binned immediately as it’s open to massive abuse (as it already has been) and leads to insanity. I refuse to accept that the starting position is even “unjust” in inverted commas. It is what it is. I am coming round to thinking that there is no middle ground here worth standing on, because as soon as you concede anything then an inch becomes a mile, as it already has. How can you prove you are not discriminating?
This kind of thing is also a direct result of gender pay gap legislation. It demands companies act to eliminate the pay gap outcome, without discrimination at the point of opportunities. This is a blatant contradiction in terms . To equalise outcomes between certain groups you cannot have equal opportunities for individuals, you have to discriminate. The thing about the world is that individual flourishing demands diverse outcomes.
The way to eliminate gender pay gap is to sterilise all women of reproductive age.
Only a small percentage of a population cohort will be able, suitable, or want to do police work. The bigger that cohort, the bigger number that small percentage yields – the converse is true.
Minority groups are so called because they are small population groups.
There is no basis to assume that the proportion of different groups suitable/wanting to do police work should be the same in all groups, or that every minority group within a general population can or should be proportionately represented in a certain activity.
(Note: non-white, mostly black people are disproportionately over-represented by a significant degree in TV advertisements, and in comparison to black, Asians – a larger cohort – are grossly underpreresebted.)
The strange thing about “inclusivity” for some, is it can only be achieved by excluding others, equality for some requires treating others with inequality, fairness for some means treating others unfairly, justice for some means injustice to others.
This is generally known as: Social Justice.
Funny old World
Every action has a reaction that’s for sure.
Is that now not a white supremacist viewpoint?
If white British are deliberately being viewed as suboptimal applicants then it must be explained why this is not a hate crime or just plain racism.
it is pure trolling.
I think they’re looking for a reaction so they can send some more folk to jail, releasing pakistani paedos to make room for thought criminals.
I find myself in difficulty expressing my disgust and contempt of our governing classes at this continuous stream of gratuitous abuses against the people of this country, without resorting to the profanity and abuse which would lead to my being sent to the dog house.
But there we are.
Recruit on Merit Only
What a radical notion!
This has been going on for years.
My son-on-law, who would have made a great fireman, was turned down by Avon Fire Service over 20 years ago
Why?
Because, like most of us, he is white.
quote: It adds: “Enabling people from an ethnic minority background to apply early does not give them an advantage in the application process, it simply provides us with more opportunity to attract talent from a pool of applicants who reflect the diverse communities we serve.”
So if it doesn’t give an advantage, why do it? If diverse candidates were interested in applying then they’d follow the same process everyone else is expected to follow surely?
Conversely, reducing the time available to submit an application from white British does not disadvantage them? No of course not. So why the difference?
Outright lying by West Yorkshire Police who don’t have a good track record when it comes to the basics in the first place.
The British police resemble their pisstake to such an extent that they reinforce my belief in simulation theory. Their utterances above are obviously entirely illogical. Any schoolboy can see that. It is like an anti-intellectual culture set up their police as a revelry in the beauty of imbecility. You can piss off if you score above 104 on an IQ test.
So why this obsession with industries “reflecting” communities?
I suppose the twisted logic goes something like: The ratios of white British staff to non-white ethnic minorities does not exactly equal the ratios in the larger community in our particular region in our particular industry. Therefore block or delay the application procedure for white British applicants for a period of time that we have calculated to be just right to restore those ratios to be reflective.
Trouble is, we’re only looking at one particular facet of one particular industry in one particular region (in this case West Yorkshire Police). It may well be that ethnic minorities are under-represented here. But it might also be the case that, for example, ethnic minorities are over-represented in the retail sector in North London, or the aviation industry, or hospitality and tourism in the North East.
You can’t possibly have anywhere near a complete picture of equal opportunity, until you’ve conducted a comprehensive overview of ALL industries in ALL regions. Of course there are going to be variations from place to place and between different companies in different sectors. The question is, does it all average out to equality of opportunity across the United Kingdom? You can’t take a specific discrepancy like this one and use it to justify this kind of “corrective racism”.
The whole notion is bull.
The police force (for this example) can only naturally reflect the community, that is, for each identifiable subgroup of the community, the rate of members of the subgroup in the police force about equals the rate of members of the subgroup in the whole community when the selection process for police force members randomly picks people from the whole community. This means the police force would need to recruit people based on conscription by the lot: Whenever a new member of the police force is needed, some member of the community is randomly selected and forced to take the job. That’s obviously not a sensible or even just technically feasible way to recruit new members of the police force and hence, except in very unusual circumstance, the police force will not “reflect the community” in the described way and claiming that this must have been caused by “morally deficient recruiting” is nonsense.
This exemplifies a typical property of political BS, by the way: The demand seems outwardly sensible and is easily understood but debunking it becomes so complicated that it’s much more difficult to understand why the original demand was BS.
Ridiculous but no surprises. The way this nonsense is progressing in Britain means that it now makes sense for a person of white ethnicity to gain employment in a foreign country, of none white ethnicity, rather than waste their time applying for jobs within Britain
Unless there are specific obstacles to people of any race applying to join the Police then no action is required. A discriminatory policy is just that and it cuts both ways. This is so obvious, that to state otherwise is a form of gaslighting and no one should accept it.
In the statement that GB News were forced to read out under Ofcom, the W York police justified it by saying that 23% of their population were not proper Brits while just 9% of the police ranks were.