Diversity or Reverse Discrimination?

[Mark_Giardina]

This message most likely will be moved to the ‘Take it Outside’ category and if that’s the case, so be it.

I truly believe that there is a fine line between diversity and reverse discrimination. I base my theory on personal experience.

The most recent experience for me occurred earlier this year when I re-applied for my old radio job that I held for 14 years. I understood going through this process that there would be others interested, and of course they deserved the right to be interviewed. Finally the list of qualified candidates came down to three people; including me. The first two “diversified candidates” for some reason did not make the cut. So that left just me. That is when the management at the radio station suddenly put the brakes on the hiring process. If that’s not reverse discrimination I don’t know what it. It became quite obvious that the only reason I was granted an interview in the first place is so that the station could cover its rear-end by claiming they talked with every viable applicant.

I happen to believe that qualifications and experience are more important than a person’s gender or race or a station’s desire to meet a quota. Don’t you? And I am not saying this just because of what happened to me. The truth is when I was a news director I searched for people with both experience and the desire to grow. Eventually I found those qualities in the two people I hired, who just happened to be women who went on to TV news careers. Their gender had nothing to do with my decision to hire them.

Well it has been six months since the job opened up and the station has yet to find anyone. Meanwhile they are getting along by tapping into their reserve of part-timers and casual employees to fill the shift.

As for me I have moved on to other career goals.

I bear no malice against anyone at the station and wish them the best of luck. But I will end this commentary by saying that if the station’s management believes they will find someone more qualified than a person who actually worked at that job for over a decade, especially for the salary they are willing to pay, then they are living in a fantasy world.

 

[ThePickleReport]

Well it has been six months since the job opened up and the station has yet to find anyone. Meanwhile they are getting along by tapping into their reserve of part-timers and casual employees to fill the shift.

Mark,
I agree with you in some points. There is a lot of "cya" a.k.a. cover your arse going on these days in regard to HIRING and FIRING for that matter. It used to be if you didn't show up on time and do your job well they would rightfully terminate you. I've seen a lot of cases (outside the radio biz mind you) where they give people MANY chances, including written and verbal warnings before finally....carefully and gently....terminating them.

In the case of the job that you speak of, are you sure that they ACTUALLY want to fill it? Sounds like they have found a way to get by "on the cheap" like every other broadcaster.

Pickle

 

[Mark_Giardina]

In the case of the job that you speak of, are you sure that they ACTUALLY want to fill it? Sounds like they have found a way to get by "on the cheap" like every other broadcaster.

Pickle


You know the same thing crossed my mind except that I doubt they (management) would have gone to all of the expense of flying people in from other states, and even Canada, if they were not serious in filling the job.

I do believe that as long as the station has bodies to fill that shift, their priorities are not focused 100% on filling that position as soon as possible. Look at the money they are saving.

Anyways, as I said before, good luck to them.

 

[Element9]

As for me I have moved on to other career goals. I bear no malice against anyone at the station and wish them the best of luck. But I will end this commentary by saying that if the station’s management believes they will find someone more qualified than a person who actually worked at that job for over a decade, especially for the salary they are willing to pay, then they are living in a fantasy world.

So then... is this a non-issue, seeing that you've moved on and reconciled the process? Because if it IS an issue, you might be better served scheduling an appointment with the decision makers and discuss the matter. Perhaps you have some recourse. If nothing else, you may get a straightforward answer as to how and why the decision was arrived at.

One more thing, just a question. Do you think you'd have been hired in Corning all those many years ago had you not been a white male? Not goading, just asking a provoking question.

-9-

 

[Mark_Giardina]

Let me answer your second question first. Being a white male had nothing to do with my being hired at the radio station in Corning. The program director of a competing station heard me on the air, liked my work and hired me over the phone. And it should be noted that the same station also hired a female announcer from where I worked as well, which will negate anyone thinking that I was the beneficiary of being part of a 'white-guy's club.'

Regarding your first suggestion about approaching the people in charge of the broadcasting operation I mentioned in my first post and inquiring as to why the hiring process stopped with me, I did that months ago. Instead of getting a direct answer, I got vague comments. Of course these people are not about to come out and say “we want a diversified candidate, therefore you are not even being considered." You think that they want to open themselves up to a possible lawsuit?

I have moved on AFTER finding out, thanks to some good old fashion investigative reporting, that I was never considered for the job in the first place.

 

[Element9]

Let me answer your second question first. Being a white male had nothing to do with my being hired at the radio station in Corning. The program director of a competing station heard me on the air, liked my work and hired me over the phone. And it should be noted that the same station also hired a female announcer from where I worked as well, which will negate anyone thinking that I was the beneficiary of being part of a 'white-guy's club.'

From the sound of it, it appears that being a white male had something to do with being hired. Had you not sounded like a white male, complete with flat "a's" and "proper diction and elocution," you might not have been hired. Granted, you could have been a white male and sounded crappy with lousy diction and New York City broad "a's" and not been hired. You could have also been African-American and had precise diction.

And of course, if the Queen had 'nads, she'd be the friggin' King.

Now, before you think I'm yankin' your chain on this issue, let me say this: If I hadn't been a white male, I doubt that I would have been hired at my first or second jobs in radio because the guys that hired me, while not racist, had pronounced prejudices. So I was lucky. I came up aces in the gene pool. I also worked cheap, and even though I sounded like a punk ass college kid, I took direction fairly well from people who would have made better correctional officers than PD's. I also worked ridiculous hours and could properly pronounce, Cheektowaga, Scajaquada and Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. Still, I can't help thinking...

I hate to say it Mark, but as talented and fortunate as you are, you sound a bit disgruntled. Why would you even broach this subject on the board if you're "over it and have moved on?" On more than a few posts over the years, you've made it clear that you were more than happy in your newfound field and missed radio not a fig.

-9-

 

[Mark_Giardina]

I hate to say it Mark, but as talented and fortunate as you are, you sound a bit disgruntled. Why would you even broach this subject on the board if you're "over it and have moved on?" On more than a few posts over the years, you've made it clear that you were more than happy in your newfound field and missed radio not a fig.

I can understand why you might think the way you do. The reason that I broached this issue in the first place is not because I am disgruntled, but felt that, as the title says, there is a fine line between reverse discrimination and diversity and that it would be interesting to see what others say, or if they too have been victims of reverse discrimination.

 

[JohnGalt]

... there is a fine line between reverse discrimination and diversity and that it would be interesting to see what others say, or if they too have been victims of reverse discrimination.

There is no fine line and there is no "reverse": If you were not hired because of your race or your sex, you were discriminated against. Equal opportunity should not mean equal outcomes or distribution of jobs equal to the racial mix of a community; to do so treats people first as members of a group and second as individuals. The constitution guarantees the rights of individuals and does not confer rights to groups. This Orwellian mangling of the constitution must stop. Heaven help us now that the manglers are in charge.

 

[ThePickleReport]

You know the same thing crossed my mind except that I doubt they (management) would have gone to all of the expense of flying people in from other states, and even Canada, if they were not serious in filling the job.

True. However, I've been in situations like that where "corporate" pulls the plug on the gig after deciding "it's not in the budget".

 

[Mark_Giardina]

True. However, I've been in situations like that where "corporate" pulls the plug on the gig after deciding "it's not in the budget".

From my understanding the job is " in the budget." It's just that since the station has not been able to find a "qualified diversity candidate," management is taking their sweet time in filling the position. Another reason, I believe, this position has been put on the back burner is because the station has two part-timers and one casual employee, along with two full-time staff to fill the shift.

 

[Element9]

[quote The constitution guarantees the rights of individuals and does not confer rights to groups. This Orwellian mangling of the constitution must stop. Heaven help us now that the manglers are in charge.

What "manglers" would those be? The "manglers" who lied this great country into a bottomless pit in Iraq, costing thousands of American soldiers' lives and a billion dollar a week repeat of Viet Nam?

Thank God the republic has survived six years of treason and a government of checks and balances has been returned.

-9-

 

[anoldguy]

Several years ago I was in a conversation with an African-American co-worker and close friend over beers. I asked this person why there are not more African-Americans or other minorities in broadcasting. The reply was that as a middle class white person it is hard for me to relate. When I (and people like me) graduated from college and started my career I still had my parents to fall back on. Yes, I had a car (a jalopy but a car with four moving wheels). I could call my parents if I got into a jam or even move back in with them. The average African-American did not have these advantages. Yes, much of their education was paid for but after graduation they had nothing. There were no fancy graduation presents from family and friends. There was no windfall to get them started. Their families were poor and there really wasn’t anyplace for them to return to. If anything, they were expected to give money to the family.
Even though, many of us think of minorities getting special privileges when it comes to getting a job in broadcasting, the reality is it’s still pretty tough on them. They still make the same crappy wages everyone else makes. When starting out and then moving into a new town they have to start fresh. They’ll have no car and still have to pay rent and buy groceries like anyone else. It’s tough. And believe it or not, they do have some college loans to pay off.

That all said, I do relate to anyone that has been discriminated for any reason. It is not right to discriminate against a qualified applicant just because he happens to be a white middle age male. It has happened to me in the past and noting what I have stated above does not make me feel any better about it.

 

[Kent]

From my understanding the job is " in the budget." It's just that since the station has not been able to find a "qualified diversity candidate," management is taking their sweet time in filling the position. Another reason, I believe, this position has been put on the back burner is because the station has two part-timers and one casual employee, along with two full-time staff to fill the shift.

While I agree with your point that there is a fine line between reverse discrimination and diversity, I have to ask a couple of logical questions that may be the case, too. My first question is would you hire you for that job? You yourself said you held the job and left it and were willing to go back for a sub-par level of pay. I can honestly see why the station would have some reservations hiring you. After all, this is a job you left for greener pastures once before. What says you're not going to up and leave again? I had a similar situation a few months back. I have a good job during the week but do radio on the weekends. I was having problems with the station I presently work at, and I was talking to a friend of mine who worked for the local Cumulus stations. Having worked for him before, he was eager to get me on staff part-time. I had worked there before both full-time and part-time and jumped ship a few months after Cumulus took over. The response I got from the management at the local Cumulus cluster was essentially, "You've had this job before, and you left it. We really don't want you back because we don't think you're committed to staying here." While I was hurt and disappointed, I can't say I don't understand their feelings. It also worked out very well for me in the end, and I feel it was Cumulus, not me, who lost. I worked things out with my current station and now find it a great place to have a good time on the weekends.

The other question I have for you is why on earth you'd want to leave a government job, especially for one in radio? Like you, I left radio to take a government job in 2004. While it's by no means a perfect job and I've definitely had better paying jobs (like the one I had in telecommunications prior to getting back into radio), it's easily one of the best jobs I've ever had. The hours are flexible, and they're required to compensate me fairly for any overtime. The system protects me from getting shafted the way I did in both telecommunications and radio. The health benefits are excellent, and, after working there five years, I'm guaranteed a government pension (if I live long enough). There's no way I'd leave this government job for full-time radio!

 

[Mark_Giardina]

The other question I have for you is why on earth you'd want to leave a government job, especially for one in radio? Like you, I left radio to take a government job in 2004. While it's by no means a perfect job and I've definitely had better paying jobs (like the one I had in telecommunications prior to getting back into radio), it's easily one of the best jobs I've ever had. The hours are flexible, and they're required to compensate me fairly for any overtime. The system protects me from getting shafted the way I did in both telecommunications and radio. The health benefits are excellent, and, after working there five years, I'm guaranteed a government pension (if I live long enough). There's no way I'd leave this government job for full-time radio!

My family asked me the same question. Here is my reply. I still like broadcasting very much and enjoyed working in that field. Yes some people may think one has to be crazy to give up a government job, with its annual pay raises, vacations and benefits, to return full-time to radio. But you see I was led to believe that I was actually missed at my former job and that I would be welcomed back. Man was I wrong.

Since this incident occurred, I came to my senses and decided to stay with government. The reason for my post is not to vent, but to raise an interesting topic and see if others have also undergone similar situations.

I am happy to say that soon I will have the best of both worlds. I will remain working in government full-time and soon will be working part-time at a local radio station. So for me everything worked out just fine.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Or, Age Discrimination?

One more consideration may be that they chose to look for a younger person with less rigid opinions about "How things ought to be". Perhaps they percieve you as less flexible than a younger, up-and-comer.

Of course, that would be age discrimination...

 

[Radknowski]

Re: Or, Age Discrimination?

One more consideration may be that they chose to look for a younger person with less rigid opinions about "How things ought to be". Perhaps they percieve you as less flexible than a younger, up-and-comer. Of course, that would be age discrimination...

Indeed, it would be. Yet this is exactly what occurs these days. It may not be anything new and it may be subtle, but it's there nonetheless: Middle aged news and sales guys (and women), getting replaced or passed over in favor of people a few years out of college who don't possess half the proficiency and knowledge, especially in the area of sales. One thing that might be working in favor of middle-aged jocks is the Classic Rock-Classic Hits formats, which have become the Music Of Your Father's Life. This might also have been the case with Oldies formats until most Oldies stations transitioned out of the format.[/Mike]

 

[Kent]

My family asked me the same question. Here is my reply. I still like broadcasting very much and enjoyed working in that field. Yes some people may think one has to be crazy to give up a government job, with its annual pay raises, vacations and benefits, to return full-time to radio. But you see I was led to believe that I was actually missed at my former job and that I would be welcomed back. Man was I wrong.

For what it's worth, I was once told I didn't have the mindset of a radio person by one of my PD's. He said my best future in radio would be in engineering or upper management. After all, I never was willing to leave a great job to go back into radio, though I did get out of telecom to get back into radio, which meant my pay going down by almost two-thirds. However, the telecom bust was on the horizon, and the long hours, bad management and increasing dissatisfaction with the company as a whole were enough to make me leave that job! I've had plenty of friends who have left whatever jobs they've had to get back into radio and/or TV. For some, it's worked well. For others, it hasn't. A good example of the latter is a friend of mine who worked for the government in meteorology and got an offer at the TV station he worked at in college. So, he quit the government job and went to the TV station. A few months after he arrived, the morning show meteorologist quit, and he was left doing the morning show. He had a morning meteorologist job at another station in a bigger market that he quit for the government job because he couldn't stand the hours! OUCH!

Since this incident occurred, I came to my senses and decided to stay with government. The reason for my post is not to vent, but to raise an interesting topic and see if others have also undergone similar situations.

I am happy to say that soon I will have the best of both worlds. I will remain working in government full-time and soon will be working part-time at a local radio station. So for me everything worked out just fine.

Congratulations on both! I hope things work for you on the government and part-time radio situation. It's worked well for me. However, I do find it kind of funny that in the two and a half years I've worked for the government, I'm asked at least weekly, "Why are you here? Couldn't you go back to Ft. Wayne, Lubbock, or whereever you were before you came here and make more money?" They're shocked when I tell them about the pay and benefits in radio!

 

[Mark_Giardina]

I do find it kind of funny that in the two and a half years I've worked for the government, I'm asked at least weekly, "Why are you here? Couldn't you go back to Ft. Wayne, Lubbock, or whereever you were before you came here and make more money?" They're shocked when I tell them about the pay and benefits in radio!

It's somewhat ironic but before I went for my interview my former boss asked me how much I made at my government job. When I told him he turned ash-white. Apparently I was making much more than he was. Yet, at the time, I was willing to take a pay cut and work longer hours just to return to the business that I loved.

Sometimes things work out for the best and perhaps this is one of those times especially when I read about stations firing news anchors and reporters (Example WHAM and WRKO) en masse.
Eventually, I am sure, the station will end up with someone right out of college, or maybe a year's experience in broadcasting willing to work long hour for little or no pay. As I told the screening panel that interviewed me for my old job this person will move on to another market and the process will start all over again, or they could hire me and know that I not only would not leave the market, but I have the experience to perform the job immediately.

Eventually management will fill their quota and I predict that within two years they will be looking for someone else. Unfortunately with the talent pool as shallow as it already is, all I can say is 'good luck' trying to find someone.

And thanks for the congratulations. I appreciate it.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

This message most likely will be moved to the ‘Take it Outside’ category and if that’s the case, so be it.

I truly believe that there is a fine line between diversity and reverse discrimination. I base my theory on personal experience.

The most recent experience for me occurred earlier this year when I re-applied for my old radio job that I held for 14 years. I understood going through this process that there would be others interested, and of course they deserved the right to be interviewed. Finally the list of qualified candidates came down to three people; including me. The first two “diversified candidates” for some reason did not make the cut. So that left just me. That is when the management at the radio station suddenly put the brakes on the hiring process. If that’s not reverse discrimination I don’t know what it. It became quite obvious that the only reason I was granted an interview in the first place is so that the station could cover its rear-end by claiming they talked with every viable applicant.

I happen to believe that qualifications and experience are more important than a person’s gender or race or a station’s desire to meet a quota. Don’t you? And I am not saying this just because of what happened to me. The truth is when I was a news director I searched for people with both experience and the desire to grow. Eventually I found those qualities in the two people I hired, who just happened to be women who went on to TV news careers. Their gender had nothing to do with my decision to hire them.

Well it has been six months since the job opened up and the station has yet to find anyone. Meanwhile they are getting along by tapping into their reserve of part-timers and casual employees to fill the shift.

As for me I have moved on to other career goals.

I bear no malice against anyone at the station and wish them the best of luck. But I will end this commentary by saying that if the station’s management believes they will find someone more qualified than a person who actually worked at that job for over a decade, especially for the salary they are willing to pay, then they are living in a fantasy world.

No offense, but after reading your post it appears to me that your former employer just didn't want you back...period.

Consider yourself fortunate because you need to ask yourself do you really want to go back and work for people who have those feelings towards you?

Of course there is discrimination, not only in broadcasting, but other professions as well. Unless you have proof and are willing to take your case before a judge, there is little you can do.

I would say their loss is your gain. Besides I heard the person who replaced you a few years ago and must say that if she is any indication of what your former employer considers on-air talent, then their idea of professionalism and mine are vastly different.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Giving Thanks

Mark,

It would appear that your old cronies did you a big favor by NOT hiring you back. In the current environment, radio is much better as a hobby than as a career.

Your bank account and retirement fund will be in far better shape working for the government. Radio is a fickle mistress for the few who can't make the transition out of "the biz", or who have achieved enough success to allow them to be comfortable.

Part-time will feed the RADIO monster that lurks within us all. The government job will (hopefully) provide a stable income, a chance to serve others, and a much more comfortable retirement. Either way, you're working for the people - just in a different role.

Rox