Rational Anarchy Publishing-1992   Lazarus Long
                                                   lazarusl@vaxxine.com

Employment Equity and other Frauds
     
     One of the biggest frauds attempted by the socialists
has been the case for employment equity. The scenario that
is often used by the hand-wringers of the left is the
visible minority or female that is unable to find employment
because men are hired first. The leftists point to the law
enforcement field and the fire departments as prime examples
of discrimination. They claim the only way to ensure
equitable hiring is through the use of new hiring guidelines
and timetables to reach a set employment ratio. The
socialists never refer to these ratios as quotas even though
anyone with an ounce of brains knows the definition of
quotas. For those who have come through the education system
in Ontario, I will give the Oxford dictionary definition,
"Quota (N.) a fixed share that must be done, contributed, or
received."
     To say that setting a ratio is not setting a quota is
double talk designed to muddy the waters and to confuse the
sheep-like followers of the left into supporting an idea
that if told in plain language would be abhorrent to them. A
quota is a quota and no amount of word twisting will make it
different.
     The leftists talk frequently about the maintaining of
standards of employment yet cry discrimination when the same
standards are applied to all applicants equally and their
chosen ones fall short.  When an incident like this happens,
as it did in the city of London, Ontario recently where the
female applicants to the fire department failed the physical
test and some of the theoretical tests, the immediate cry
from the left is that the standards should be changed to
allow more women to pass. In the London case the Ontario
Human Rights Commission stated that the Fire Department
should modify its standards and to hire the women that had
failed instead of some of the men that had passed the
testing procedures. This is a typical example of socialist
thinking, it is fine to discriminate against certain groups
if it is politically expedient. I say let those who wish to
enter a field of employment do so equally without
handicapping the applicants. Let the standards remain
unadulterated by politics and choose the best applicants
that apply. To do otherwise undermines the effectiveness of
the organisation and in some cases may risk the public well-
being.
     The failure, of the politically correct, to recognise
the basic biological differences between the sexes causes
one to wonder if they are blinded by their theories to the
physiological differences or are they actually that
unlearned and incompetent that they fail to notice that,
which any prepubescent boy or girl knows. It is a known fact
that the average male has, in comparison to the average
female, a heavier bone structure and the more powerful
muscle development that go along with it. Therefore, one
would think, it should be reasonable to think that certain
occupations would be more suitable for males than females.
Occupations that require the lifting of heavy objects would
seem to be better suited to the male than the female.
Economically this makes sense, as the stronger male can do
more work in a given amount of time with less fatigue and
reduced chance of injury and the related cost of workmen's
compensation. When one factors in the increased medical
costs of injured workers it becomes clear, to those that
think and do not merely repeat political slogans, that it
makes little economic sense to force companies to hire a
group of workers that will cost them far more in medical and
compensation claims than their productivity generates.
     The other employment equity issue, that of minority
hiring, has a solution already in place and we need not
spend scarce public funds building another bureaucracy to re-
invent the wheel. The remedy to discriminatory hiring exists
through the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Canadian
Charter of Rights. If a person from a visible minority feels
that they have been passed over for employment because of
their race, let them take their case to the Human Rights
Commission and have their hearing where the business or
organisation must justify its decision to an independent
committee. Let us not force companies to hire lesser quality
employees merely to fill a government set quota. This only
leads to lower productivity but also to the risk of a
backlash from those who could not be hired even if they were
better qualified. That a backlash will develop is assured,
because people will become frustrated at the sight of others
taking jobs that could have gone to them except for
political expedience.


{page|1}

RATIONAL ANARCHY PUBLISHING