Comments, relating to the topic, are welcome, add a great deal to a blog, but must be in English, with no profanity, hate-filled insults, or links (unless pre-approved) To contact me with questions: rainnnn7@hotmail.com.




Friday, January 24, 2025

Meritocracy

 

 image from Stencil and our sunset photo from 2019

After writing a blog a about age-ism, I planned on a follow-up. That was until this week hit me with all the social media talk, often on both sides of an issue, which I believe is important to a culture if it wants to succeed. It's the title for this blog.

Here is the issue-- How do we appoint or hire people for key jobs, and there are a lot of important jobs that many do not see that way. What if the appointments are based on diversity, ethnicity, and/or inclusion or should it be based in merit, ability, skills, and/or what they have already achieved? To be good at a job must they have already done it or might they prove it by how they have handled other jobs? Should it be based on skin color, sex, or from where they came? DEI gave credit even to corporations for applying it to new hires or promotions. How's that working for ya?

For way too long, our country applied a different kind of racial and sexual "filtering". If you were a black who wanted to get an important position, you had to be a hundred times better (over exaggeration) than a white looking for the same job. And if you were a woman, you could just forget it. That also was not meritocracy, nor is giving it to someone for who their family is (unless it's a family-run operation, which is their business to sink or swim). Meritocracy too often was not the key application to be used.

As for what are key jobs, it's easy to list some and none relate to the celebrity world. It's not just the obvious ones like medically related, which includes pharmacists, nurses, doctors, therapists, etc. We depend on these people to help us when something has gone wrong with our or a loved one's health. Do we care what race, sex, or color their skin is? Likely only if we are a bigot.

But also meat packing plants. Oh, you didn't see that as important? How about when it's carelessly maintained or even deliberately polluted? 

Of course, it should be obvious that fire department, police and any part of the legal system are very important for the security of a people. I use the term should be as DEI has been applied to those positions too. Don't we want a highly qualified judge if they are to address a case for us? Or does it only matter, in the legal system, that those judges have a certain political ideology? I guess that's fine if it's your ideology that we're talking about? How about the head of big churches, DEI or merit for who gets the position?

Are there any jobs more important than that of educators? They shape the future and does their merit matter or only their political opinions? What will they be teaching those future generations and will it help them achieve merit or just rely on their own DEI qualifications?

Do you like the idea of DEI mechanics? Okay with you if they are not merit based when they go to repair your broken down vehicle? Airplane repairs? and so many other jobs done by repair people of electric, plumbing, internet, etc.

I want to make the case here that DEI sent us too far down the wrong road to correct a wrong. A true meritocracy is the answer where no matter from where you came or what sex you are, you can get the job if you passed their key needed tests. One, I'd suggest, is caring about doing a good job for the ones you are working with whether bosses or customers. Also respecting that your job is an important cog in a big wheel. Want a job that seems more important to you, improve your needed skills.

One of the first corporations for which my husband worked (I was a stay-at-home mom) had a philosophy that later got changed by those who took over power but had not created the company. The key philosophy back then to me was that all the workers were important. A technician could get a spot on a company plane when a project needed a tech specialist if the seat was open. Can't have that came in later, where only some PR people were important. That company was already an important corporation but those who came along lost sight of a key reason why.

There is more to say on this topic, but what would come next might prove a distraction from what is above. I think it's important for citizens to consider long and hard from where they want their leaders and workers to come. 

Next week will be the one connected to age-ism and in its case-- beauty. BUT I am not leaving meritocracy, with more on it February 8th-- the possible distraction.





No comments: