Any females looking for job?

[1fast1]

  On 8/14/2009 at 11:50 PM, David said:

Unless the position is gender-specified eg waitress or stewardess, the rquirements is questionable.

 

Even that is gender discrimination. Why not "waiters" and "stewards"? Granted that not a lot of men would apply for such jobs (especially airline stewards), but why overtly discriminate against them from the start?

 

Singapore's civil rights and HR policies are still stuck in the middle ages. We've got to get with the program and start taking notes from countries like the US.

[Nullifi3d]

Its not really gender discrimination; its just what my boss wants. Cos she's a female also. Guys are more than welcome to apply.

[Watwheels]

  On 8/15/2009 at 12:35 AM, Nullifi3d said:

Its not really gender discrimination; its just what my boss wants. Cos she's a female also. Guys are more than welcome to apply.

I think you should say guys get an equal chance vs the ladies. "More Than Welcome to Apply" can mean many things.

 

If you see a lot of the ads, ppl dun want to be rude or to be come across as gender discriminators will put the words " Female Working Environment" . From there ppl get the idea.

 

 

 

[Redplanet]

  On 8/14/2009 at 5:50 PM, Windwaver said:

Being female always easier to find jobs

 

Unless you're fat and look like a cow.

[Redplanet]

  On 8/15/2009 at 12:35 AM, Nullifi3d said:

Its not really gender discrimination; its just what my boss wants. Cos she's a female also. Guys are more than welcome to apply.

 

Female boss? Pity u....

[Nullifi3d]

Sadly i agree with you 100% because i've studied the Western Human Resource Mgt VS the Far East way of HR.

 

The more unfortunate truth is that i'm just a puppet in a show run by bigger people.

 

So if there is a situation where my initial posting reflected a tinge of gender biasness i do apologise.

[Nullifi3d]

  On 8/15/2009 at 12:48 AM, Redplanet said:

Female boss? Pity u....

 

Haha... sometimes i do miss the male style of management during my army days. Females can be a lil'....how we say... long-winded.

[Sosaria]

  On 8/15/2009 at 12:34 AM, Turboflat4 said:

Even that is gender discrimination. Why not "waiters" and "stewards"? Granted that not a lot of men would apply for such jobs (especially airline stewards), but why overtly discriminate against them from the start?

 

Singapore's civil rights and HR policies are still stuck in the middle ages. We've got to get with the program and start taking notes from countries like the US.

 

Even so, in the USA, there are plenty of laws ostensibly to prevent race, gender, age, what-have-you, discrimination in the employment process, but does it really work? Example, in the resume, an applicant need not disclose his age, race or even gender - but the HR can easily deduce these details; it doesn't take a Sherlock Holmes. Whatever the applicant chooses not to reveal, will still be found out at the interview stage anyway - so I feel that anti-discrimination laws are not really that effective. It's pretty much just for show and symbolic purposes.

 

[1fast1]

  On 8/15/2009 at 12:55 AM, Sosaria said:

Even so, in the USA, there are plenty of laws ostensibly to prevent race, gender, age, what-have-you, discrimination in the employment process, but does it really work? Example, in the resume, an applicant need not disclose his age, race or even gender - but the HR can easily deduce these details; it doesn't take a Sherlock Holmes. Whatever the applicant chooses not to reveal, will still be found out at the interview stage anyway - so I feel that anti-discrimination laws are not really that effective. It's pretty much just for show and symbolic purposes.

 

I don't quite agree. If anything, I think the US actually carries the anti-discrimination thing to the other extreme. E.g. - read about that much-publicised case where a fire or police department was forced to stop using a (ostensibly culturally-unbiased) mathematics test on candidates because too few Blacks were getting in (Blacks tended to score lower than Whites). That was considered de facto racial discrimination.

 

I think we shouldn't carry it to that extreme. But here in sunny Singapore, we are still infantile when it comes to recognising and stamping out these subtle (and not-so-subtle) forms of discrimination. Not so long ago, there were ads in the newspaper that openly declared things like "Chinese preferred" or even "Only Chinese need apply". (BTW, I would still consider it racial discrimination if a minority race were to have been preferentially singled out).

 

Of course, the govt "discouraged" that sort of thing, and it more or less petered out. (Although we still have the "Mandarin speaking preferred" thing going on, even in jobs which don't conceivably have a lot of dealing with monolingual Mandarin speaking clients).

 

Why is it that a lot of people think gender discrimination is still OK? Especially when the discrimination favours the fairer sex. I think if the ad had said "Males preferred", there would be a big hue-and-cry from all the feminazis and perhaps even AWARE had they been made aware of it.

 

And, no, I *don't* think it's OK for a female boss to insist on female underlings, just as I don't think it's OK for a male boss to insist on underlings of a particular sex (for whatever reasons).

[Watwheels]

I know TS have no ill intentions and he is just carrying out orders. I just want to point out smth.

 

What I hate most is age discrimination. Before gov was campaigning the "value your aged worker" thingy, they were "promoting" the "under 35" when looking for workers. Although I wasn't 35 yet when reading the ad but it's really an eyesore and the worst thing is private coys follow the same.

 

And becos of that this "practice" somewhat changed into a "standard" mindset for employers....even for today. Sad to say when it comes to employment other dan age discrimination, there are also other discrimination like what other bros had mentioned.

Edited August 15, 2009 by Watwheels

[Neokn]

You are looking for Fatimah? LOL

Edited August 15, 2009 by Neokn

[Princey_anne]

No stress work even lower pay?

[Friendstar]

NEA gender bias!

 

Lets stomp this!

Edited August 15, 2009 by Friendstar

[Nullifi3d]

  On 8/15/2009 at 3:06 AM, Friendstar said:

NEA gender bias!

 

Lets stomp this!

 

Ok point noted. Any one else would like to start a new thread on gender biasness? Because it seems like some of you guys have taken my post wayyyyyyyy out of context.

 

Congratulations you've turned this simple gesture into malignant, tumour growing cancerous growth. I applaud your imagination.

 

Lets have coffee and we can discuss it in a more dignified manner instead of sitting behind a computer screen googling or wikipedia-ing Human Resource issues and discrimination in the workplace.

[Schneider79]

  On 8/14/2009 at 2:13 PM, Darth_mel said:

Chop off your KKJ then you will qualify...

 

 

No need to chop.

 

葵花宝典 is your best friend !

[Blackforte]

  On 8/14/2009 at 5:50 PM, Windwaver said:

Being female always easier to find jobs

 

 

 

i 2nd that

Edited August 15, 2009 by Blackforte

[Blackforte]

  On 8/15/2009 at 12:34 AM, Turboflat4 said:

Even that is gender discrimination. Why not "waiters" and "stewards"? Granted that not a lot of men would apply for such jobs (especially airline stewards), but why overtly discriminate against them from the start?

 

Singapore's civil rights and HR policies are still stuck in the middle ages. We've got to get with the program and start taking notes from countries like the US.

 

 

your boss wants female staffs,

yet you're workin there.

 

are you.....

.....girlish?!?

 

hahahah

[Babyt]

certain jobs having females are better mah.

 

CSO leh...front desk somemore...more suitable for women...men who do such jobs must have passion for cso and low pay.