wood burning stoves*
The moose likes Meaningless Drivel and the fly likes reservations in Indian private sector( the idea sucks) Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Other » Meaningless Drivel
Bookmark "reservations in Indian private sector( the idea sucks)" Watch "reservations in Indian private sector( the idea sucks)" New topic
Author

reservations in Indian private sector( the idea sucks)

Kishore Dandu
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 10, 2001
Posts: 1934
According to this link it is part of the CMP proposed by the new goverment.

This will be a major deterrent for many.


Kishore
SCJP, blog
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

This is really bad.

Kishore,
I am happy that you are in US.


Groovy
Arjun Shastry
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 1874
I don't think they will do that.When there are changes in power like this,political leaders want to see how different sections of society react to different kind of issues like this.Accordingly they formulate the future strategies.


MH
Mani Ram
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 11, 2002
Posts: 1140

'It (the government) will immediately initiate a national dialogue with all political parties, industry and other organisations........


They might initiate, but they will never proceed after that. So, no need to worry about this.


Mani
Quaerendo Invenietis
Manish Hatwalne
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 22, 2001
Posts: 2579

Yeah, you are right!! The idea sucks!!!

I hoope it doesn't get introduced in private sectors. That would deteriorate the quality. I guess only merit/performance/caliber should prevail.

- Manish
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

Maharashtra has already passed the bill. It is going to be introduced in companies that have been given government grants , for e.g. lands at lower cost etc. Many companies like Oracle, Infy etc fall under the list. Time for Lay off's
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

I think Congress is really serious regarding this. This is part of CMP.
Arjun Shastry
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 1874
I still don't think govt can force any private business on whom to hire or whom to layoff.Even if some private business get some utilities on subsidized rates doesn't mean govt can enforce hiring of people.I believe orginator of these tactics is some Communist Party/Samajwadi leaders to gauge the reaction from different Indian industries.People need not worry,Manmohan Singh and Chidambaram are in power.
{
...That would deteriorate the quality
}
Not necessary.Quality might improve also.How many Indian companies can say they are best in the world?
[ June 10, 2004: Message edited by: Ram Abdullah D'Souza ]
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

Quality might improve also

How ? If anyone is good they would have already made it. Recruitements are done on merit basis right?
Mani Ram
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 11, 2002
Posts: 1140
Originally posted by Ram Abdullah D'Souza:
Not necessary.Quality might improve also.


How!? How many private sectors selects / rejects employees based on the community? None, in my opinion. There might be few cases where community was given a preference, but that has more to do with the individual recruiter than the corporate policy as such.

So, the private sector already recruits the best they can afford. If a person is good, he will get a job, irrespective of his community background. Now, putting a reservation policy here will definitely bring down the productivity. I don't understand how the quality or productivity can go up.


Originally posted by Ram Abdullah D'Souza:
How many Indian companies can say they are best in the world?


That is a different issue. But, if a company is performing average with the current employees, they might perform bad after the reservations - but they can't become good because of reservations.
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by Ram Abdullah D'Souza:
{
...That would deteriorate the quality
}
Not necessary.Quality might improve also.


When job will go to undeserve people just because of reservation, I dont know how quality will improve.

As I was active participant in anti-reservation movement in 1990-91 so the idea of "reservation" just burn two spoons of my blood.

AW I wish that in MH they wont be able to apply that reservation policy.


"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
Manish Hatwalne
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 22, 2001
Posts: 2579

Originally posted by Ram Abdullah D'Souza:
{
...That would deteriorate the quality
}
Not necessary.Quality might improve also.How many Indian companies can say they are best in the world?

[ June 10, 2004: Message edited by: Ram Abdullah D'Souza ]


(1) I strongly beg to differ on "Quality might improve also...". The only govt organization which selects purely based on merit is Defence (there could be exceptions in research based organizations alos DRDO and CDAC etc). And they are still the best govt organization.

(2) If you compare "Indian companies" with Indian govt organizations, they far better. One visit to those govt places, and you'd find out that their apathy is very appaling. Private companies and govt orgs are incompareble in terms of efficiency, quality and integrity.

However, comparing "Indian companies" with rest of the world is different issue altogether.

- Manish
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

As I was active participant in anti-reservation movement in 1990-91


I did not read your name in news papers.
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

How many Indian companies can say they are best in the world?

Are there reservations in USA?
[ June 10, 2004: Message edited by: Pradeep Bhat ]
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by Pradeep Bhat:

I did not read your name in news papers.


If you would have read then I would have not been here talking to you ...

I was planning for self-immolation in 26Jan-1991 but on 24 or 25 Jan Supreme court gave some order on Reservation for that I cancelled it .. and once its cancelled its difficult to have that much courage again ..
Arjun Shastry
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 1874
Originally posted by Manish Hatwalne:

(1) I strongly beg to differ on "Quality might improve also...". The only govt organization which selects purely based on merit is Defence (there could be exceptions in research based organizations alos DRDO and CDAC etc). And they are still the best govt organization.

To my knowledge,Defence organizations too have quota based system.Basically age limit is higher for specific section of people.



(2) If you compare "Indian companies" with Indian govt organizations, they far better. One visit to those govt places, and you'd find out that their apathy is very appaling. Private companies and govt orgs are incompareble in terms of efficiency, quality and integrity.

These govt organizations don't have 90% reservation but much less,20%?or may be slightly higher or lower?so 80% of apathy is due to 'talented' people and '20%' is due to 'quota' people?
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

These govt organizations don't have 90% reservation but much less,20%?or may be slightly higher or lower?so 80% of apathy is due to 'talented' people and '20%' is due to 'quota' people?


20%> In some states it is almost 80%, I guess. Tamil nadu for example.
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

Originally posted by R K Singh:


If you would have read then I would have not been here talking to you ...

I was planning for self-immolation in 26Jan-1991 but on 24 or 25 Jan Supreme court gave some order on Reservation for that I cancelled it .. and once its cancelled its difficult to have that much courage again ..


Are you planning to protest if new reservation is made a law?
Will the US companies agree for reservations?
Mani Ram
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 11, 2002
Posts: 1140
Originally posted by Pradeep Bhat:


20%> In some states it is almost 80%, I guess. Tamil nadu for example.


It's 69% in Tamil Nadu. Here is the break-up

18% SC
1% ST
30% BC
20% MBC & DNC
31% Open to all
Manish Hatwalne
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 22, 2001
Posts: 2579

I am not saying reservation is the sole reason for govt organization's poor performance. Its entire work cuture, selection procedure is pathetic. It's even annoying to discuss it... They suck!!!

Deffence do have som sort of age relaxation, but AFAIK, in rest of the procedure caliber rules. What I have quoted is based on what I remember reading in one of the interviews of defence person himself.

- Manish
Ashok Mash
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 13, 2000
Posts: 1936
I have nothing against Government's attempt to provide individuals from difficult backgrounds a chance by reserving some of the opportunities for them. But I think the model that�s in place now is fundamentally flawed.

The basic flaw in the idea is the way they identify those who deserve reservation or quota. If I take a sample of ten families from my hometown, at least five of them are lower middle class but not all from backward cast. That is, there are just about as many well-to-do lower cast families in certain parts of India, as well-to-do forward communities. I guess there should a more case-by-case approach for different regions in India and based on the social set-up there, the rules of qualification for special reservations should change. For example, in Orissa or Bihar, almost all lower cast people deserve reservations, but in Kerala, it should be based on the how poor a person�s background is.

Its only fare to advice Private Organisations to help the Government in helping to improve the state of the poor and needy in India, but I agree with others here, it can not be imposed. May be Government should try providing better opportunities to the poor and socially backward communities, so that they will have a chance to compete for job opportunities based on merit that depending on reservations.


[ flickr ]
Ashok Mash
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 13, 2000
Posts: 1936
Originally posted by Manish Hatwalne:
Its entire work cuture, selection procedure is pathetic. It's even annoying to discuss it... They suck!!!


If we were to generalise, I have to agree with this view, but I have been pleasantly surprised by the changes in the recent years.

As long as I can remember, in my town, Regional Telephones and Communications Office was one of the worst Government Offices to deal. But in 2002, when I called in to register a complaint, I was greeted by a very professional, enthusiastic, middle-aged woman with better mannerisms and courtesy that one would expect in a small town like mine. She knew what she was talking about and explained to me how the brand of dial-up modem that I was trying to install will not work with that particular exchange, and all those details. It was interesting to see how well behaved the otherwise lousy linesmen behaved this time around! I have similar experience with Regional Transport Office as well, where I was politely told off that I cannot take a license in days (as it used to be), but I will have to apply and write a theory test before I even get learners.

I am quite optimistic!
Mani Ram
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 11, 2002
Posts: 1140
Change in the telephone office is understandable - they face the competition from private companies and they have to change if they have to survive. But change in the RTO is a surprise! Hey, the private companies are not into this business yet - are they?

Even I see some improvements, mainly in the insurance companies and the nationalized banks. The way they treat the customers in much better than what it used to be earlier.
Manish Hatwalne
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 22, 2001
Posts: 2579

Originally posted by Ashok Mash:
I have nothing against Government's attempt to provide individuals from difficult backgrounds a chance by reserving some of the opportunities for them. But I think the model that�s in place now is fundamentally flawed.

The basic flaw in the idea is the way they identify those who deserve reservation or quota. If I take a sample of ten families from my hometown, at least five of them are lower middle class but not all from backward cast. That is, there are just about as many well-to-do lower cast families in certain parts of India, as well-to-do forward communities. I guess there should a more case-by-case approach for different regions in India and based on the social set-up there, the rules of qualification for special reservations should change. For example, in Orissa or Bihar, almost all lower cast people deserve reservations, but in Kerala, it should be based on the how poor a person�s background is.

Its only fare to advice Private Organisations to help the Government in helping to improve the state of the poor and needy in India, but I agree with others here, it can not be imposed. May be Government should try providing better opportunities to the poor and socially backward communities, so that they will have a chance to compete for job opportunities based on merit that depending on reservations.


I wholeheartedly agree with this, the only reservatios I agree is for EBC.
Besides education alreay has approx 50% reservations (CMIW). I had posted my own story long ago about my experience regarding these reservations.

- Manish
Paul McKenna
Ugly Redneck
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 08, 2000
Posts: 1006
Originally posted by Ashok Mash:
I have nothing against Government's attempt to provide individuals from difficult backgrounds a chance by reserving some of the opportunities for them. But I think the model that�s in place now is fundamentally flawed.


Why? Why should government be doing this? Their job is to ensure that access to proper education is available to all.. not to provide jobs as well. Do you realize you are approaching communism with the above statement? If I own a business, why should the government be telling me whom I should also be hiring? If I want to hire only people from my community it is my wish.. after all I am the one who is running the business and it is my profit that is at stake. If people of other communities do not wish to purchase my products because of my hiring practices that is fine.. that is the market telling me to change. But to even suggest that government has a role in deciding my hiring practices is simply bizzare to me!


I guess there should a more case-by-case approach for different regions in India and based on the social set-up there, the rules of qualification for special reservations should change. For example, in Orissa or Bihar, almost all lower cast people deserve reservations, but in Kerala, it should be based on the how poor a person�s background is.


Do you realize what you are saying? You are doing more harm to these people than good. According to the statement above you are saying that as long as there is equal distribution of wealth amongst communities then there is no problem, but where there is disparity in distribution the government must intervene with affirmative action. But tell me, why should the government stop at 50% wealth distribution amongst the communities. Why not implement affirmative action to ensure that 80% of the lower caste people are the wealthiest and 20% of the upper caste. Heck! Lets make it 90-10.. or may be even 99-1. See... this is a slippery slope and one tread down this path will lead to more and more and more.

A better idea would be to suggest that government provide better access to education for lower caste people. After all, what decides employability today? It is education.


Its only fare to advice Private Organisations to help the Government in helping to improve the state of the poor and needy in India, but I agree with others here, it can not be imposed. May be Government should try providing better opportunities to the poor and socially backward communities, so that they will have a chance to compete for job opportunities based on merit that depending on reservations.


Why is it fair to advise Private Organizations? Government has no business advising Private Organizations. Instead Government should be helping the lower caste people setup their own businesses. This way income distribution will even out in a natural way. Or is the Government afraid that lower caste people will simply not be able to compete with upper castes in business skills?? You decide which signal is being sent to the people by means of reservations. When you decide to make a quota for a section of the community it normally means that section is weak and unable to compete.


Commentary From the Sidelines of history
Max Habibi
town drunk
( and author)
Sheriff

Joined: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 4118
Like Ice-T says, chill fellas.

There's no reason to blow our tops here.

M
[ June 10, 2004: Message edited by: Max Habibi ]

Java Regular Expressions
Paul McKenna
Ugly Redneck
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 08, 2000
Posts: 1006
This is a classic case of "See I Told You So..."

When the left came into power they had an agenda, and it is unravelling itself now. These so called "progressive" measures will ruin the economic progress of the last 4 years and will lead us back to square one!
Bhau Mhatre
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: 199
If I want to hire only people from my community it is my wish.. after all I am the one who is running the business and it is my profit that is at stake.

Paul,
I agree with you on almost everything that you said, except the above statement. It is called segregation and is a very bad thing. I know you don't intend to actually implement such a thing, but sometimes good messages with good intensions run the risk of can instilling ugly ideas if not conveyed carefully, IMHO.

Other than that, we are in-phase


-Mumbai cha Bhau
Mani Ram
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 11, 2002
Posts: 1140
I totally agree with Paul...err..with Bhau
Pradeep bhatt
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 27, 2002
Posts: 8919

The new government policied are based on 1960 mindset.
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by Mani Ram:
I totally agree with Paul...err..with Bhau


You all capitalist ..

I am with you Mani ...
Ashok Mash
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 13, 2000
Posts: 1936
Originally posted by Paul McKenna:

Why? Why should government be doing this? Their job is to ensure that access to proper education is available to all.. not to provide jobs as well. Do you realize you are approaching communism with the above statement? If I own a business, why should the government be telling me whom I should also be hiring? If I want to hire only people from my community it is my wish.. after all I am the one who is running the business and it is my profit that is at stake. If people of other communities do not wish to purchase my products because of my hiring practices that is fine.. that is the market telling me to change. But to even suggest that government has a role in deciding my hiring practices is simply bizzare to me!

Government, as an elected body, has the responsibility to make sure it represents every section of the community and obviously should be providing welfare and opportunities to all parts of the society. A purely market driven economy, which automatically corrects itself, is far from practical, not only in India, even in the first world! There should a certain level of regulations/interventions by the authorities to ensure fare-play and to prevent discrimination. IMHO, it�s not communism, just democracy and its crucial balancing act. Would you consider �Tax system� as �communist� and anti-democratic?


Do you realize what you are saying? You are doing more harm to these people than good. According to the statement above you are saying that as long as there is equal distribution of wealth amongst communities then there is no problem, but where there is disparity in distribution the government must intervene with affirmative action. But tell me, why should the government stop at 50% wealth distribution amongst the communities. Why not implement affirmative action to ensure that 80% of the lower caste people are the wealthiest and 20% of the upper caste. Heck! Lets make it 90-10.. or may be even 99-1. See... this is a slippery slope and one tread down this path will lead to more and more and more.

Is it possible that you misunderestimated.. err, misunderstood me there? I was not on about �re-distributing wealth based on the monitory status�, but providing support for a group that needs it most, and deciding who needs support should be based on the social & economical situation of particular individual, and if not implemented at that level, it should at least consider the social and economic set-up of the region that he/she is from. As in my previous post, this is to support an ailing person/family/community to get them back on the development/prosperity track, so that they can help themselves and the rest of the society than slowing down the entire development of the region.

A better idea would be to suggest that government provide better access to education for lower caste people. After all, what decides employability today? It is education.

That�s another point that I think you missed to notice. As you are very well aware of, in certain parts of India, there isn�t much of a �lower cast issue� as other parts, and a purely �caste based� reservation system is pure unjust to those unfortunate so-called �upper-caste� but poor/suffering individuals/groups.

Why is it fair to advise Private Organizations? Government has no business advising Private Organizations. Instead Government should be helping the lower caste people set-up their own businesses. This way income distribution will even out in a natural way. Or is the Government afraid that lower caste people will simply not be able to compete with upper castes in business skills?? You decide which signal is being sent to the people by means of reservations. When you decide to make a quota for a section of the community it normally means that section is weak and unable to compete.

This again is about discrimination. If a group of firms, say TATA Group decides they wouldn�t employ homosexuals because MD/Owner/CEO of TATA is homophobic, its Government's responsibility to make sure that he gets �advised�. There should be rules of the land, laid out with the the welfare of everyone in mind, which everyone, including Private Organizations, should follow. Well, that�s the case at the moment everywhere anyways!
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by Ashok Mash:
but providing support for a group that needs it most, and deciding who needs support should be based on the social & economical situation of particular individual,

I beg your pardon. its not about providing support its about employment.
Is it good idea to give job to needy one rather than deserving one. ??


those unfortunate so-called ‘upper-caste’ but poor/suffering individuals/groups.
Till some years back I was in the favor of reservation on the basis of financial/economic status. But after knowing that how easily it can be manipulated, now today I am totally against reservation of any kind.

What govt. can do is provide the equal opportunities to all. FULL STOP. Nothing more than that.

If a group of firms, say TATA Group decides they wouldn’t employ homosexuals because MD/Owner/CEO of TATA is homophobic, its Government's responsibility to make sure that he gets ‘advised’.
Agree with you.
But its not Govt. job to force TATA to employ, lets say, atleast 3 homosexuals in each brach of their office.
Arjun Shastry
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 1874
As I said earlier,this is by few self proclaimed socialist leaders and some Communist leaders.I don't think they are going to implement that.
Paul McKenna
Ugly Redneck
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 08, 2000
Posts: 1006
Originally posted by Bhau Mhatre:
I agree with you on almost everything that you said, except the above statement. It is called segregation and is a very bad thing. I know you don't intend to actually implement such a thing, but sometimes good messages with good intensions run the risk of can instilling ugly ideas if not conveyed carefully, IMHO.


Here is the thing that is perhaps being missed. If I practise segregation in my hiring practices then the consumers have the choice of boycotting my products thereby forcing me to change my hiring practice. Isnt that a better way of enforcing regulation as compared to government asking me to fill say 10% of my employees with people from different ethnic backgrounds.

Still, I'll conceed that this is not a perfect world and such a market driven regulation is next to impossible to achieve (still achievable but tough). Government should do no more than state that I should give equal consideration to every candidate based on merit rather than their skin color/religion/ethnicity/caste etc. What government should not be doing is telling me that I need to employ 10% of people from lower caste community.
Paul McKenna
Ugly Redneck
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 08, 2000
Posts: 1006
Originally posted by Ashok Mash:
Government, as an elected body, has the responsibility to make sure it represents every section of the community and obviously should be providing welfare and opportunities to all parts of the society. A purely market driven economy, which automatically corrects itself, is far from practical, not only in India, even in the first world! There should a certain level of regulations/interventions by the authorities to ensure fare-play and to prevent discrimination. IMHO, it�s not communism, just democracy and its crucial balancing act. Would you consider �Tax system� as �communist� and anti-democratic?


I reject this notion that it is government's job to ensure that all communities are equally employed. It is people's responsibility to ensure that they are equally employable. For this they may turn to the government for funding towards education or small business etc. If one section of the community gets more attention from the government simply because of their ethnic background then what prevents even the "forward" communities from lobbying the government. This will establish a dangerous precedent of every community turning to the government to solve their problems rather than solving it themselves.

Regulation to achieve fair employment practices can be done by legislating "Equal Opportunity" clause. Which means that no business should qualify or disqualify a candidate based merely on their religion/color/ethnicity. But I cannot accept this notion that fair regulation entails quota based hiring.

If I am a business owner, I am already paying the government enough to keep away from meddling in my practice by means of taxation. If beyond this the government decides it needs to tell me how to run my business, I am simply going to take my business and my jobs to greener pastures where I have more control. This is what will happen in a communist / socialist state. Bottom line is that all this regulation for achieving so called "fair employment" practice will result in no employment for anyone.


Is it possible that you misunderestimated.. err, misunderstood me there? I was not on about �re-distributing wealth based on the monitory status�, but providing support for a group that needs it most, and deciding who needs support should be based on the social & economical situation of particular individual, and if not implemented at that level, it should at least consider the social and economic set-up of the region that he/she is from. As in my previous post, this is to support an ailing person/family/community to get them back on the development/prosperity track, so that they can help themselves and the rest of the society than slowing down the entire development of the region.


What is that support here? The government in this case feels support is to give a job. That is not right.. to support would mean to give funds for educating the people who are out on their luck. Not to give them a job!


This again is about discrimination. If a group of firms, say TATA Group decides they wouldn�t employ homosexuals because MD/Owner/CEO of TATA is homophobic, its Government's responsibility to make sure that he gets �advised�. There should be rules of the land, laid out with the the welfare of everyone in mind, which everyone, including Private Organizations, should follow. Well, that�s the case at the moment everywhere anyways![/QB]


The law of the land should be that sexual orientation should not even be considered for employment. But not to suggest that an employer must hire people of different sexual orientation as a principle. When it gets down to that, it becomes something like a diversity program rather than a fair employment program.
Helen Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jan 13, 2004
Posts: 1759
Aren't there any reservists in Indian history who have done great things for India ? If so most of this discussion should be mute.

If by reservists you mean less priviledged peoples.

Googling...


Le Cafe Mouse - Helen's musings on the web - Java Skills and Thrills
"God who creates and is nature is very difficult to understand, but he is not arbitrary or malicious." OR "God does not play dice." - Einstein
Warren Dew
blacksmith
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 04, 2004
Posts: 1332
    
    2
I think "reservations" means "quotas".

Pradeep, straight quotas have been ruled unconstitutional in the U.S. "Affirmative action" to benefit certain minorities without using quotas are common in education but rare in the private sector; some limited types of affirmative action are required in certain government jobs and for companies going after certain government contracts. "Equal opportunity", which means hiring based on merit without discrimination against these minorities, is generally required by law.
Bhau Mhatre
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: 199
Paul McKenna: ---------
Here is the thing that is perhaps being missed. If I practise segregation in my hiring practices then the consumers have the choice of boycotting my products thereby forcing me to change my hiring practice. Still, I'll conceed that this is not a perfect world and such a market driven regulation is next to impossible to achieve (still achievable but tough).

Isnt that a better way of enforcing regulation as compared to government asking me to fill say 10% of my employees with people from different ethnic backgrounds.
---------

No. Both of them are equally bad.

There are three options
1. Segregation- market regulates itself automatically
2. Punish segregation AND disallow affirmative action.
3. Affirmative action- Govt. regulates everything.

You seem to be suggesting that #1 is okay. I think that is a wrong way to go because it leads to divisiveness. When such hatred brews, it does not remain limited to jobs. It quickly spills over to admissions in educational institutes, hospitals, .... fill up a hundred other things..... and is even worse than than nepotism. And we have enough of it already in place. If a community thats holds access to resources and raw materials refuses to sell it to others, the theory of market driven regulation goes out of the window. It creates chaos, mistrust, and crimes.


Paul McKenna: Government should do no more than state that I should give equal consideration to every candidate based on merit rather than their skin color/religion/ethnicity/caste etc.

Bhau: This is same as accepting #2. Which is what I am suggesting. Which is what Warren mentioned above about US. But it contradicts your suggestion of segregation.


Paul McKenna:What government should not be doing is telling me that I need to employ 10% of people from lower caste community.

Bhau: This is same as rejecting #3 where we both are in agreement.
Helen Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jan 13, 2004
Posts: 1759
Globalisation itself is run on quotas - it's not market driven but driven by forces creating markets and values.
 
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
 
subject: reservations in Indian private sector( the idea sucks)