Are You Good at Chenistry? Do You Enjoy Research?

[Bud_Spencer]

Are You Good at Chemistry? Do You Enjoy Research?

Then McGill University isn't for you. They only want you if your skin tone is the right shade or you are sexully confused:

Minority professor denied grants because he hires on merit: 'People are afraid to think'

https://nationalpost.com/news/canad...-he-hires-on-merit-people-are-afraid-to-think

And watch those goddamned promouns, eh?

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Gah, sorry for the typo in the title

 

[CornusKousa]

Hiring on merit instead of skin color is RACIST!!!

The "peace is war and 2+2=5!!" factor among democrats is phenomenally high.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Then McGill University isn't for you. They only want you if your skin tone is the right shade or you are sexully confused:

Minority professor denied grants because he hires on merit: 'People are afraid to think'

https://nationalpost.com/news/canad...-he-hires-on-merit-people-are-afraid-to-think

And watch those goddamned promouns, eh?

*chuckles*

The grant application clearly stated the guidelines of application. The professor knew full well that unless he followed the "prescribed" hiring guide lines, his application could be rejected. ( in fact he was rejected for funding prior, for exactly the same reasons)

So all this means is someone else got grant money and not him. His own fault, and if he wants to grandstand about diversity and inclusion....good for him. Maybe he should apply for a grant for that, I suspect there is Fed money out there for that too.

BTW, this has nothing to do with McGill , with the exception of his tenure there, the grant and grant money comes from an NGO, not the University.....

 

[Lazaran]

*chuckles*

The grant application clearly stated the guidelines of application. The professor knew full well that unless he followed the "prescribed" hiring guide lines, his application could be rejected. ( in fact he was rejected for funding prior, for exactly the same reasons)

So all this means is someone else got grant money and not him. His own fault, and if he wants to grandstand about diversity and inclusion....good for him. Maybe he should apply for a grant for that, I suspect there is Fed money out there for that too.

You weren't supposed to recognized the obvious flaws in the story.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

You weren't supposed to recognized the obvious flaws in the story.

Show me a post by Bud that doesn't have flaws in it, and I'll buy the first round of drinks......

 

[Bud_Spencer]

*chuckles*

The grant application clearly stated the guidelines of application. The professor knew full well that unless he followed the "prescribed" hiring guide lines, his application could be rejected. ( in fact he was rejected for funding prior, for exactly the same reasons)

So all this means is someone else got grant money and not him. His own fault, and if he wants to grandstand about diversity and inclusion....good for him. Maybe he should apply for a grant for that, I suspect there is Fed money out there for that too.

BTW, this has nothing to do with McGill , with the exception of his tenure there, the grant and grant money comes from an NGO, not the University.....

Just as Gad Saad what being unwoke at McGill gets you.

How would you feel about grant applications requiring all hired personnel be white male and Christian?

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Show me a post by Bud that doesn't have flaws in it, and I'll buy the first round of drinks......

Only racists hire based on race, sexists on sex. It's not a "flaw" to note that the grant required racist and sexist hiring practices for being awarded the grant. Is that even legal in Canada?

 

[pecksniff]

Does the research involve lysergic acid diethylamide?

 

[pecksniff]

Gah, sorry for the typo in the title

No, leave it as is! The study of Joan Chen is an appealing concept!

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Just as Gad Saad what being unwoke at McGill gets you.

How would you feel about grant applications requiring all hired personnel be white male and Christian?

If that is how they are written, and can legally pass our employment standards that's fine.( I actually think there are a few ways that could be done,but I doubt anyone actually would try).

Do you have a problem with people who don't follow the rules? Because you sure seem to be arguing here, in favour of that?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Only racists hire based on race, sexists on sex. It's not a "flaw" to note that the grant required racist and sexist hiring practices for being awarded the grant. Is that even legal in Canada?

Show me the racist/sexist hiring practices? (BTW do you even understand terms equity, diversity and inclusion, under the Canadian Employment Standards?)

The grant application was clear, you want the money, follow the rules of the people handing out the money. That seems pretty simple to me....why do you have problem with it? Oh right you are a bit of an Anarchist anyhow.....


Also,and this point is not really highlighted in the article,but he couldn't even get past the first phase of the grant application. ( this is the second time he failed...I have no idea how good he is, in his field of study, but as a grant application writer, he fails miserably)

Even if he had agreed to the equity, diversity and inclusion requirements, his actual area of study would then move on to phase two....no proof he would get past phase two.....

 

[Bud_Spencer]

No, leave it as is! The study of Joan Chen is an appealing concept!

I'll second that.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

If that is how they are written, and can legally pass our employment standards that's fine.( I actually think there are a few ways that could be done,but I doubt anyone actually would try).

Do you have a problem with people who don't follow the rules? Because you sure seem to be arguing here, in favour of that?

A rather nihilistic view of things, no? And what, pray tell, are those employent standards in Canada? I would have though that they were not unlike our own, prohibiting discrimination in employment, admissions, etc. Since the government is now demanding one discriminate, I assume that is black-letter law in the GWN?

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Show me the racist/sexist hiring practices? (BTW do you even understand terms equity, diversity and inclusion, under the Canadian Employment Standards?)

The grant application was clear, you want the money, follow the rules of the people handing out the money. That seems pretty simple to me....why do you have problem with it? Oh right you are a bit of an Anarchist anyhow.....


Also,and this point is not really highlighted in the article,but he couldn't even get past the first phase of the grant application. ( this is the second time he failed...I have no idea how good he is, in his field of study, but as a grant application writer, he fails miserably)

Even if he had agreed to the equity, diversity and inclusion requirements, his actual area of study would then move on to phase two....no proof he would get past phase two.....

i understand DIE quite well, thank you. Are they in Canadian law or is the law more benign-sounding, prohibiting discrimination in hiring?

Being more liberatarian-minded, I'm okay with people hiring whom they wish, but with government it's a different story. We are forced to associate with and support government, so that government ought to refrain from discriminating on the basis of race, since all races are compelled to support it.

In this chap's case, the people have every right to expect that research carried our in their name be done absent discrimination and the best applicant hired.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

A rather nihilistic view of things, no? And what, pray tell, are those employent standards in Canada? I would have though that they were not unlike our own, prohibiting discrimination in employment, admissions, etc. Since the government is now demanding one discriminate, I assume that is black-letter law in the GWN?

When I comment on American policy, I look it up first. So here you are, starting a thread about something you obviously don't understand.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

i understand DIE quite well, thank you. Are they in Canadian law or is the law more benign-sounding, prohibiting discrimination in hiring?

Being more liberatarian-minded, I'm okay with people hiring whom they wish, but with government it's a different story. We are forced to associate with and support government, so that government ought to refrain from discriminating on the basis of race, since all races are compelled to support it.

In this chap's case, the people have every right to expect that research carried our in their name be done absent discrimination and the best applicant hired.

Again, the fact that you are failing to look up, read, and understand the laws of Canada,is not my problem, nor do I need to explain them. You however might wish to consider learning them,prior to starting threads. Or do you just like to look like a dumbass?

 

[pecksniff]

i understand DIE quite well, thank you. Are they in Canadian law or is the law more benign-sounding, prohibiting discrimination in hiring?

DIE sounds pretty benign.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

When I comment on American policy, I look it up first. So here you are, starting a thread about something you obviously don't understand.

My post was not about Canadian law, but about the morality of the State forcing an employer to hire based on race, sex, etc. You're the one who dragged the law into it, so answer the question.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

DIE sounds pretty benign.

It was designed to sound that way, but the substance is quite malignant.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

My post was not about Canadian law, but about the morality of the State forcing an employer to hire based on race, sex, etc. You're the one who dragged the law into it, so answer the question.

No, the law is in the article, that is why you fail to understand. The grantee has to follow Canadian Employment Standards, which they wrote in the grant application. The applicant, refused to abide by that,and was disqualified.

So here you are, arguing for a person not following the rule of law. ( As I pointed out in two other posts, you are cheering for the bad guy....again).

Canada is not USA ( and for that I am forever grateful).

 

[pecksniff]

It was designed to sound that way, but the substance is quite malignant.

You're probably the kind of idiot who sees Affirmative Action that way.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

DIE sounds pretty benign.

It is, DIE lays out the requirement to have in place in your hiring policy. By following the Standard, you basically absolve yourself, ( or corporation) of being hauled before the Human Rights Tribunal.

The HRT has never ruled in favour of a defendant BTW....so the best advice is to avoid going before them in the first place....*chuckles*

 

[Fuzzy1975]

You're probably the kind of idiot who sees Affirmative Action that way.

Can you say CRT???? *chuckles*

He is such a bonehead, he uses an American view point, in another sovereign country.....with zero understanding of the subject matter, after reading an article in what would be considered a Canadian rightwing publisher. (still miles left of the Democrats though)

 

[Bud_Spencer]

No, the law is in the article, that is why you fail to understand. The grantee has to follow Canadian Employment Standards, which they wrote in the grant application. The applicant, refused to abide by that,and was disqualified.

So here you are, arguing for a person not following the rule of law. ( As I pointed out in two other posts, you are cheering for the bad guy....again).

Canada is not USA ( and for that I am forever grateful).

Only the grant requirements are in the article, not the law. Are those requirements aligned with Canadian law? Let's see:

In Canada, federal and provincial or territorial laws protect the:...

right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination based on
race
national or ethnic origin
colour
religion
gender or sexual orientation
age
mental or physical disability
same rights for women and men

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigratio...canada/human-rights/your-rights-freedoms.html

So when a granting body mandates that a lesser-qualified person be hired over a more-qualified person because of the lesser-qualified person's race, that is naked state-sponsored discrimination. The University of Alabama used to have a similar system for admissions, you will note.

Now, quite aside from the law, which seems clear to me, the morality of state-mandated discrimination is no more attractive today than it was 60 years ago in the Deep South.