Do I have to keep going to diversity seminars?

Dear Diversity Diva: Why do I have to keep going to diversity seminars at work? We have them every year and I want to know what’s up with that. Isn’t it my bosses that need to be hearing this stuff anyway? — Sick of Seminars

Dear Sick: You have to keep going to diversity seminars for the same reasons you still need to get an annual physical from a doctor even though you had one back when they put Winnie the Pooh Band-Aids on your boo-boos.
Diversity seminars and workshops often trigger eye-rolling and sighs of exasperation because people think they get along just fine with their co-workers and don’t need any extra help.
No doubt, some seminars are better than others. Some can be informative, fun and lively. Others can be simplistic, preachy or just downright boring.
But even the worst diversity session that your employer sends you to has some information or some insight into your co-workers that you need to know about.
If, for example, you see even one co-worker mouthing off about her sexist bosses, or you see your minority or disabled or older co-workers visibly upset when the issue of bias or discrimination comes up, then you are looking at the reason why you’re there.
And the fact that you didn’t cause or aren’t responsible for someone else’s issue doesn’t mean it doesn’t affect you, your department or your company.
Employees who have to check some part of their identify at the workplace door probably think there are not enough good diversity workshops taking place.
A lot of distaste that many have for these training sessions stems from the defensiveness these sessions trigger among the people who assume that on some level they or the group they are a member of will be targeted as “the bad guy.”
But if you start being one of those employees who truly aims to learn just one thing every session, you’ll find that going to them seems less tedious. And you may even find it has some positive impact on your work environment.

Should an office gift of condolence be a political donation?

Dear Diversity Diva: I work in a small department of a large, private business. A member of our team had a death in his family and the team collected money for flowers, only to find out that the wishes of our co-worker’s loved one was to donate money to one of the presidential campaigns. Our office is divided politically, so I don’t feel comfortable with that. What do you think? — Perplexed by Politics

Dear Perplexed: I understand why you would be uncomfortable. You’re trying to support a co-worker in his time of loss, honor someone’s last wishes and avoid offending co-workers.
Even though you didn’t make that last point in your question, ultimately that’s what your real concern is. If the loved one’s request was a donation to Save the Whales or the American Cancer Society, you probably wouldn’t think twice.
But donating money to a political campaign — especially in a tightly contested, extremely polarized presidential campaign — will almost definitely rub someone in the opposing camp the wrong way.
In working for many government municipalities and some private-sector jobs, collecting for a political campaign, even indirectly, would be strictly forbidden.
In a situation where a small group of personal friends at work want to donate money in this fashion in their off-work time, it’s a different issue because it ceases to be a “workplace” donation. But when the situation really is a work department coming together in this way, it’s not fair to put anyone in the position of later finding out that their generosity was used in a way they didn’t intend.
Probably the best way to address this is to convert the money raised into a money order or cashier’s check in your co-worker’s name and give it to him in a condolence card, leaving him to use his judgment in how the money will be used to honor his loved one.
That way, the people in the department have achieved their real objective of supporting their co-worker, the co-worker is touched by the gesture, and political diversity is respected with no one having to feel offended by having their money directly go to a candidate that they had no intention of supporting.

Take boss' resume screenings to human resources department

Dear Diversity Diva:
I am a midlevel supervisor who helps select resumes for my boss to interview applicants for upcoming openings. My boss has made very clear that she wants me to weed out applicants with Hispanic-sounding last names. I don’t like doing this but I also don’t want to upset my boss. What should I do?
Signed, Caught in the Middle

Dear Caught:
The obvious and easy answer is to go to the human resources department. That’s the right thing to do.
But there’s probably a couple of other things at play that make the answer less than direct. One is that you like the boss and don’t want to see her get into trouble. You want some free pass that allows you to do the right thing by the applicants while simultaneously protecting your boss and avoiding awkwardness.
Sorry, but that isn’t going to happen. You can continue doing what your boss wants, and no one may ever be the wiser. Or you can continue doing what your boss wants and then you may find yourself sitting across from a lawyer in a deposition for a case brought by a Hispanic applicant who brings a lawsuit. Now that will be uncomfortable.
You could try appealing directly to your boss and pointing out that what she is doing is unfair and not the most efficient use of your time. However, logic usually never defeats prejudice, so that will most likely not work. Also, and this may be one of your initial concerns, you would be left vulnerable to possible retribution once your boss realizes you’re not on the same page.
If you’re not going to report your boss to her boss or HR, then the next best thing is to do your job of sifting resumes and when you turn them over, make clear that you’ve picked the best applicants from the resumes, which includes any good picks that have a Hispanic-sounding last name. If she doesn’t like it, then both of you can take the issue to human resources together. Chances are, that will be the end of that.
That doesn’t mean that your boss may not be called on the carpet down the line since she will proceed to do her own “screening” or that you won’t be dragged into it. All it means is that you didn’t allow yourself to be a tool in willful discrimination and maybe your boss will be influenced by your example.

Isn't a job posting specifically seeking minority applicants unfair?

Dear Diversity Diva: Not to beat a dead horse, but I strongly disagree with your last column. Are you saying that you would not be offended and turned off from applying for a job if it were advertised “we’re particularly seeking white applicants”? — Ticked from Two Weeks Ago
Dear Ticked: Subtlety doesn’t always translate well in print. So, I’ll say it more clearly: Companies that primarily want white employees don’t have to advertise it in their job postings. Minority job applicants can see it when they go to the job interview and fail to see diversity walking up and down the hallways.
If I along with other professional or working-class minorities stopped applying for jobs in businesses where we were the distinct or nonexistent minority, especially in management, then most of us would never have held a job.
Ticked, I would never presume to tell you or anyone else that they should not be offended by companies making an extra push to have minority job candidates. It’s your right to be offended at whatever strikes you as unfair.
But I reiterate that a job posting is nothing more than an advertisement — a recruitment device — to get as many qualified people to apply for a job as possible. Qualified is the key word. And you can’t get qualified diversity without a diverse pool to choose from in the first place.
The big mistake that most people make is assuming that if a company advertises specifically for diversity, it definitely will give the job to a minority. That’s not the case, and I have yet to meet any minority who thinks that color alone is a qualifying criteria.
By encouraging a wider selection process for individual jobs, though, over the course of time, a nondiverse company has a shot at changing. If you think there’s a better, less divisive way, make suggestions to your company or join organizations that address these issues.
I would love to see the day when race is not an issue, when corporate America naturally looks like the crews in the “Star Trek” shows. However, racial diversity in the workplace is still a hot button issue, with no perfect solutions devised yet.
And since, according to the U.S. Census, today’s racial minorities will become the majority by 2042, better solutions will just have to show up because we very well may have the same workplace challenges showing up in different skin tones.
Personally, I’m hoping for ”Star Trek.”

Is it right for a company to encourage racial minorities to apply for a job?

Dear Diversity Diva: The other day while looking at job postings in my field, a top company had a job opening for a midlevel professional, adding that they were encouraging racial minorities to apply. Not only did that offend me, but I feel discouraged from applying because I’m white. — Peeved by Posting
Dear Peeved: I hear you loud and clear.
Basically you’re offended because a company that you really want to work for seems to blatantly be stating that you’re not a desirable candidate because of your race. At least that’s the way you took the posting.
I’m sure that you’re equally offended when you go for a job interview and just about everyone you see is white — with no visible diversity to be found. I mean you are offended by that too, right?
Because while one seeming preference may be openly stated, the other is openly practiced. Whether the lack of diversity within an organization is purposeful, accidental or just due to indifference, in the eyes of the average qualified candidate who doesn’t fit the profile, it can look as blatantly offensive and unsettling as the job posting was to you.
A black man (actually, a biracial man) might be our next president, but CNN has yet to break the news that workplace discrimination and glass ceilings no longer exist.
When companies openly advertise for diversity, by any other name, it still smells like affirmative action. For some, no matter how well they understand the historical and contemporary reasons for extra recruiting, at some level it still feels unfair.
But feelings don’t replace facts.
For example, in the specific posting you mentioned, the company sought midlevel minority candidates, which means they’re narrowing the field of whom they want to apply to not just any old person of color, but for a racial minority with several years of experience in the field. In other words, would you be qualified anyway to apply if the posting said “particularly interested in white candidates”?
Also, when a company goes to that much extra trouble of including wording like that in a job advertisement, it’s most likely because their current work force is so decidedly monochromatic that it has become a problem for clients or customers and members of that work force who care about diversity and inclusion.
For every handful of whites who saw that posting and was resentful that it specifically seemed to target minority applicants, there was a minority candidate suspicious about why the company had to go out of their way to encourage minorities to apply in the first place.