Immigrant is also a “verified” category. We have a whole federal ministry dealing with immigration related topics.
Also here in a form or another.
This is not about giving bonuses but eliminating disadvantages.
You give a “bonus” to an immigrant in the moment you decide that a certain number of jobs must be assigned to them.
You give a “bonus” to a woman in the moment you decide that a certain number of jobs must be assigned to them.
You give a “bonus” to a man in the moment you decide that a certain number of jobs must be assigned to them.
All are bad it nothing else because you cannot be sure that for that specific job there are enough qualified candidates of the right category to fill all the available positions. Sure, you can ask people to study (help them, offer incentives etc.) for that position, but you cannot force them to study for that position.
Eliminating disadvantages means that everyone has the opportunity to try (and I totally agree with you that we must aim for this), not that someone could have it easier.
An immigrant has disadvantages ? Maybe, but to eliminate them you need to work on the causes and this need years, it cannot be done “just because” by law, the end result will be xenophobia (too easy to shout “immigrants takes our jobs”) and the immigrant will still have the same disadvantages the next time since you only closed your eyes on the causes, simply ignoring them without resolving them, hoping they will go away. And sometimes to solve the causes you need to take some unpopular decisions.
Prejudice and outright xenophobia is a very real thing here still.
It was a problem also here, and probably it still is. And there are reasons, like there are reasons where you are. Not that they were/are justified or reasonable, but people (intended as masses) are stupid. And stupidity cannot be solved by law.
It has been proven time and time again that women, immigrants and disabled are less likely to be hired even when they have the same level of qualification. So the real people having a “bonus” are white males. If we can’t break this bias the easy way, the hard way with quotas it is then.
All are bad it nothing else because you cannot be sure that for that specific job there are enough qualified candidates
Have you taken a look at those quotas? They are always worded “When candidates have the same qualifications, X will be given preference in hiring”.
Nobody is given a job just for who they are.
Eliminating disadvantages means that everyone has the opportunity to try
A common misconception. Take the article I linked previously: Everyone can apply for a rental apartment. However people with foreign sounding names are not given equal chance of receiving said rental. It’s in fact the whole premise of the Civil Rights Movement in the US: Yes, slavary and even segregation was abolished but people still were and are discriminated against on the basis of who they are.
An immigrant has disadvantages ? Maybe, but to eliminate them you need to work on the causes and this need years
“You have problems now? Too bad, maybe in a couple years we can help.” Do I really have to comment on this?
you only closed your eyes on the causes, simply ignoring them without resolving them
Coupled with the last paragraph: Have you considered doing both? Helping people in the here and now and also working on long term solutions? Kind of like when breaking a bone a doctor gives you painkillers for the immediate relief and a cast to support the long term healing process?
And stupidity cannot be solved by law.
No, but you can prevent a good chunk of stupid people from doing stupid stuff by outlawing the stupid stuff.
Also here in a form or another.
You give a “bonus” to an immigrant in the moment you decide that a certain number of jobs must be assigned to them.
You give a “bonus” to a woman in the moment you decide that a certain number of jobs must be assigned to them. You give a “bonus” to a man in the moment you decide that a certain number of jobs must be assigned to them.
All are bad it nothing else because you cannot be sure that for that specific job there are enough qualified candidates of the right category to fill all the available positions. Sure, you can ask people to study (help them, offer incentives etc.) for that position, but you cannot force them to study for that position.
Eliminating disadvantages means that everyone has the opportunity to try (and I totally agree with you that we must aim for this), not that someone could have it easier.
An immigrant has disadvantages ? Maybe, but to eliminate them you need to work on the causes and this need years, it cannot be done “just because” by law, the end result will be xenophobia (too easy to shout “immigrants takes our jobs”) and the immigrant will still have the same disadvantages the next time since you only closed your eyes on the causes, simply ignoring them without resolving them, hoping they will go away. And sometimes to solve the causes you need to take some unpopular decisions.
It was a problem also here, and probably it still is. And there are reasons, like there are reasons where you are. Not that they were/are justified or reasonable, but people (intended as masses) are stupid. And stupidity cannot be solved by law.
It has been proven time and time again that women, immigrants and disabled are less likely to be hired even when they have the same level of qualification. So the real people having a “bonus” are white males. If we can’t break this bias the easy way, the hard way with quotas it is then.
Have you taken a look at those quotas? They are always worded “When candidates have the same qualifications, X will be given preference in hiring”. Nobody is given a job just for who they are.
A common misconception. Take the article I linked previously: Everyone can apply for a rental apartment. However people with foreign sounding names are not given equal chance of receiving said rental. It’s in fact the whole premise of the Civil Rights Movement in the US: Yes, slavary and even segregation was abolished but people still were and are discriminated against on the basis of who they are.
“You have problems now? Too bad, maybe in a couple years we can help.” Do I really have to comment on this?
Coupled with the last paragraph: Have you considered doing both? Helping people in the here and now and also working on long term solutions? Kind of like when breaking a bone a doctor gives you painkillers for the immediate relief and a cast to support the long term healing process?
No, but you can prevent a good chunk of stupid people from doing stupid stuff by outlawing the stupid stuff.