Mail: "CDS Threatens To Block Promotions Unless Officers Improve The 'Inclusivity And Diversity' Of Their Units"

#1
"The new head of the Armed Forces has threatened to block the promotions of thousands of officers unless they improve the ‘inclusiveness and diversity’ of their units.

An internal document leaked to The Mail on Sunday reveals that General Sir Nick Carter, who takes over as Chief of the Defence Staff in June, intends to punish commanders who fail to adopt politically correct measures designed to help troops of different genders, faiths and sexual orientations work together."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ficers-improve-inclusivity.html#ixzz5C4TC2mX5

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/08/army-officers-told-promotion-will-depend-inclusiveness/
 
Last edited:
#2
More PC bullshit.....qualifications, ability and merit should be the primary considerations when promotion is considered.... End of!
 
Last edited:
#3
Unless you change society as a whole he is batting on a sticky wicket. Sweet little thing like Nadia Hussain racially abused on a regular basis when ever she is out and about , an associate of mine is convinced the majority of Muslims are suicide bombers/child abusers and he is not the sort of bloke who will change his view , he predicted wrongly about 5 years ago that we were due for civil war cos of all the immigrants. Far to many people have a mindset that they refuse to change no matter what their background. David Lammy gobbing off about stop and search in his constituency , that AC's were being targeted........most of the recent murders have been AC on AC. What are the plod supposed to do ? , ''Excuse me Sir we are not going to search you but can we ask if you have any concealed weapons ? '' .....'' No ? , ok sorry for the delay please go about your business''.
Councils continually herding ethnic minoritys into one specific area and wondering why they do not integrate.
York and North Yorkshire is predominantly white but the hard working Polish that live in the area are viewed with the usual ''Tekkin our jobs'' mentality but those same plebs are quick to praise the very popular Babakan Polish eatery when ever they visit .
 
#4
this diversity bullshit is the worst thing that can happen to the armed forces.
so im a black person with a degree in engineering trying to become an officer in the navy, i was subjected to all the tests everyone else was. i was able to pass them all by a good margin to boot, i have also just finished my SIFT and was told i did well, they even explained why i did well in what i did and what i did wrong were it was appropriate.
if i am to find out i was simply hired to make diversity quotas then i can tell you that it is the worst insult they can throw at me.
i want to believed that my skills were what brought me in, not my skin colour.
what was all that hard work for?
if it isn't the case and it was based on my merit i became an officer then this whole crap delegitimises my success. my hard work will mean shit if there are more minorities like me that can simply walk in.
i will say that the only minorities that agree with this cancer called "inclusion" are people without skills or people that don't put in the hard work but want the benefits of it.
 
Last edited:
#5
I’m glad the PSOF and the Daily Hate have caught up from news about two years old.

I’ve dealt with D&I cases - they’re not about “snowflakes” or some such, mainly it’s about dinosaurs who like bullying people and trying to destroy them for fun. I took pride from having that objective on my OJAR, and every switched on bloke and girl I worked with did too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
#6
I’ve dealt with D&I cases - they’re not about “snowflakes” or some such, mainly it’s about dinosaurs who like bullying people and trying to destroy them for fun. I took pride from having that objective on my OJAR, and every switched on bloke and girl I worked with did too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

With the greatest respect, I think you have missed the points made at #4. I accept that you may not have mentioned "quotas", but once you start selecting people, or treating them differently, as a result of the diversity mantra, then you are on a slippery slope where the best person for the job is disqualified for PC reasons.

And whilst we are on the subject, why are left-handed or red-haired people not mentioned by CDS Desig?
 
#7
I’m glad the PSOF and the Daily Hate have caught up from news about two years old. etc etc
Izzat spiteful sarcasm really you Alfred? Guaranteed to earn the approval of the Purple Twatlet but sadly you've demeaned yourself with those two counts of dismissive prejudice.

Within the service this subject may well have cooled-off some time ago but now it's out in the wider domain, hence of interest and opinion here and elsewhere.

Aside from the thoughts and experience of the RR elders; it is discomforting to see that a relative Younker, @MrALIOUS, has inferred that "*Tokenism" could very likely denigrate his hard-earned & worthy achievements in the current climate.


*Many years ago I observed this term as it arose across the pond. In those UK pre-PC days how we used to chuckle in the firm conviction that only Merit held sway on this side.

Dinosaurs? IMO Every generation will always grow a few, no matter how rigorously they are 'educated'/hunted down/passed over. The worst one I ever encountered was an otherwise highly professional S/M CO Commander (a Dartmouth 13yr-old entry BTW) who's inborn prejudice against SD Listers resulted in the blocking of the most deserving GL transfer candidate within his E branch for a long time before and since.

Much later that candidate went on to deserve his SD List brass hat (plus an Empire honour) whilst his salt horse nemesis marked time until passover and retired sans any Empire honour.



Finally, @alfred_the_great, RR appreciates the view from those still busily 'Active' but mark ye well that the sands of time trickle away relentlessly even for those privileged beings... :WINK:
 
#8
I am aware of no quotas on the front line; ninja stoker might be aware if we have targets for recruiting but I'd suggest they're different to quotas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#9
I’m glad the PSOF and the Daily Hate have caught up from news about two years old.

I’ve dealt with D&I cases - they’re not about “snowflakes” or some such, mainly it’s about dinosaurs who like bullying people and trying to destroy them for fun. I took pride from having that objective on my OJAR, and every switched on bloke and girl I worked with did too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I would give you a thousand likes for that post if I could. Having read, across all the military forums, so much antipathy to the idea of promoting inclusion through SJARs, despite, it having been in force for a while, there is a clear need to ramp up the pressure. Being in a minority group in the armed forces is not easy and protections are often given mere lip service. This is the view of the Ombudsman as well as my own opinion. It is not about quotas, it is about how people are treated when they are serving. And any member of the Armed Forces with a decent approach would take pride in that. It is about treating everyone with dignity and respect and encouraging that in the workplace. The fact that it doesn't happen throughout the Armed Forces is the problem that needs to be addressed. The antipathy to the idea is indicative of the problem, particularly where the attitudes espoused on forums, impact the views of prospective applicants who happily fall into line, despite the fact that they are yet to join. Training the bullies of the future.
 
#10
I would give you a thousand likes for that post if I could. Having read, across all the military forums, so much antipathy to the idea of promoting inclusion through SJARs, despite, it having been in force for a while, there is a clear need to ramp up the pressure. Being in a minority group in the armed forces is not easy and protections are often given mere lip service. This is the view of the Ombudsman as well as my own opinion. It is not about quotas, it is about how people are treated when they are serving. And any member of the Armed Forces with a decent approach would take pride in that. It is about treating everyone with dignity and respect and encouraging that in the workplace. The fact that it doesn't happen throughout the Armed Forces is the problem that needs to be addressed. The antipathy to the idea is indicative of the problem, particularly where the attitudes espoused on forums, impact the views of prospective applicants who happily fall into line, despite the fact that they are yet to join. Training the bullies of the future.
While I think that diversity and equality are certainly important issues and should be promoted lets not forget that it is only one part of the repertoire of skills and attributes needed by leaders or those aspiring to leadership positions. It is no good a champion of diversity and equality being promoted on that basis alone if they are poor people managers, technically not too proficient or have poor powers of command (for example).

My point being that promoting inclusion is only one part of the requirement. To block a promotion on that basis rather than assessing the whole skill set of the individual is short sighted. I would imagine diversity would be included in any promotional/leadership course these days and someone who is weak in this area would have the chance to learn and develop.
 

Spare_Rib

Lantern Swinger
#11
It truly baffles (and worries) me that people think that D&I is a bad thing?! @MrALIOUS please do try and keep an open mind until you’re serving; I’m hoping (like the vast majority of us) that you’ll see the benefits to the team that having an inclusive environment brings. And rest assured you won’t be selected or judged based on anything other than your own talents and abilities. Ironically, the reason behind that is that we promote D&I policies to ensure that that is the case. The Armed Forces track BAME (and female) recruitment to understand whether we are appealing to that section of society, but we certainly don’t just let people in based on their ethnicity or because of a quota.
 
#12
It truly baffles (and worries) me that people think that D&I is a bad thing? @MrALIOUS please do try and keep an open mind until you’re serving; I’m hoping (like the vast majority of us) that you’ll see the benefits to the team that having an inclusive environment brings.
Sigh.

Of course diversity and inclusion isn't a bad thing.

What IS a bad thing is the PC mindset which really threatens the fabric of our society.

Example 1:
Someone says something which someone else perceives to be sexist, or a hate crime. Regardless of the circumstances, perception means that it IS sexist, and a hate crime must be investigated by the police.

Example 2:
@MrALIOUS perceives that his hard work to achieve qualifications and join the RN might well be undermined by "this diversity bullshit". He says he wants to believe that his skills were what brought him in, not his skin colour. "What was all that hard work for?"

So, what do you say to HIS perception? Oh yes.........".......please do try and keep an open mind until you’re serving; I’m hoping (like the vast majority of us) that you’ll see the benefits to the team that having an inclusive environment brings. "

So much for the relevance of perception. It truly baffles (and worries) ME that some people can't see the issue here.
 

Spare_Rib

Lantern Swinger
#13
Sigh.

Of course diversity and inclusion isn't a bad thing.

What IS a bad thing is the PC mindset which really threatens the fabric of our society.

Example 1:
Someone says something which someone else perceives to be sexist, or a hate crime. Regardless of the circumstances, perception means that it IS sexist, and a hate crime must be investigated by the police.

Example 2:
@MrALIOUS perceives that his hard work to achieve qualifications and join the RN might well be undermined by "this diversity bullshit". He says he wants to believe that his skills were what brought him in, not his skin colour. "What was all that hard work for?"

So, what do you say to HIS perception? Oh yes.........".......please do try and keep an open mind until you’re serving; I’m hoping (like the vast majority of us) that you’ll see the benefits to the team that having an inclusive environment brings. "

So much for the relevance of perception. It truly baffles (and worries) ME that some people can't see the issue here.
*more sighing* I don’t think your examples show enough evidence of our ‘society unravelling’. Example 1: there has to actually be a crime committed before anything is labelled as a ‘hate crime’, and would have to qualify as a crime under the normal burden of proof. Therefore the only differences between a ‘normal’ crime and a hate crime is that the motivation is based on the victim's disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity, and the severity of available punishments. So are you saying that the police shouldn’t investigate crimes that might fall under the categorisation of hate crime? And ‘someone says something that someone else perceived to be sexist’ wouldn’t be investigated as a hate crime as gender isn’t (currently) included in the categories. But again the police would investigate a crime (maybe harassment or similar) if it warranted it and the CPS would only prosecute if the case warranted it, as with any other crime. I personally want to live in a society where if anyone perceives that they have been a victim of crime that it is taken seriously and investigated.
Example 2: I fear that MrALIOUS perception is indicative of the bad press that D&I gets rather than the actual aims and outcomes of having an inclusive environment. I’d still rather have him (incorrectly) sceptical of the process than genuinely affected by it - surely it’s worse if the colour of his skin, sexual orientation, gender were actually barriers to joining as they have been in the past. In summary, I still don’t see the issue here.

*takes cover for incoming*
 
#14
Sorry, can't quite get that so many are ignoring the obvious. Ability, qualifications, merit, irrespective of diversity and inclusivness should dictate promotion.....irrespective of gender, colour, Creed and even, dare I say it, sexual identity, should always be the base line requirements for promotion. Anything else risks the effectiveness that individual can contribute to the job in hand!
 
#15
Comments on Post #13 by #Spare Rib


QUOTE "Example 1: there has to actually be a crime committed before anything is labelled as a ‘hate crime’, and would have to qualify as a crime under the normal burden of proof. " UNQUOTE/

Technically, you may be right. But simply saying that it is a hate crime means that the police are obliged to investigate.

QUOTE/ "And ‘someone says something that someone else perceived to be sexist.......’ taken seriously and investigated. " UNQUOTE/

I'm really sorry, but I can't follow what you are trying to say.

QUOTE/ "Example 2: I fear that MrALIOUS perception is indicative of the bad press that D&I gets rather than the actual aims and outcomes of having an inclusive environment. " UNQUOTE/

Quite possibly. But are you saying that whilst it is appropriate to treat perception of sexism as valid, MrALIOUS' perception is invalid?[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:
#16
My point is that #superpom's post at #14 is correct. Following trendy PC guidelines does not necessarily get the best result for any organisation.
 
Last edited:
#17
U
Sorry, can't quite get that so many are ignoring the obvious. Ability, qualifications, merit, irrespective of diversity and inclusivness should dictate promotion.....irrespective of gender, colour, Creed and even, dare I say it, sexual identity, should always be the base line requirements for promotion. Anything else risks the effectiveness that individual can contribute to the job in hand!
But including promoting inclusivity in sjars for consideration at a promotion board does not mean ignoring leadership, intelligence, job ability, qualifications. It just means that a good candidate will not be considered good enough if they are inclined to prejudice towards certain minority groups and will be seen in an even better light if they can show active steps to promote a workplace where every individual is treated with respect, regardless.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#18
I’m glad the PSOF and the Daily Hate have caught up from news about two years old.

I’ve dealt with D&I cases - they’re not about “snowflakes” or some such, mainly it’s about dinosaurs who like bullying people and trying to destroy them for fun. I took pride from having that objective on my OJAR, and every switched on bloke and girl I worked with did too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Me also.

The concept of diversity, inclusion and equality is 100% spot-on. If only it were actually applied.

Many however, take issue with the fact the Armed Forces completely ignore the glaring shortcomings in this aspect, whilst blithely claiming they practice true equality, they completely ignore it with regard the majority of their workforce.

WHAT?!

We discriminate against people who choose to prefer to have long hair, or coloured hair, moustaches, goatees or "cult haircuts", or those who have facial tattoos, irrespective of gender, nationality or ethnicity. Does that prevent them doing their jobs any less than anyone else?

Likewise people with piercings such as earrings are discriminated against by gender. If we permit someone to wear a turban because of their religion, shouldn't we permit anyone to wear a turban regardless of faith, likewise a skullcap or indeed a mitre?

Odds are, whilst many traditionalists will invariably disagree strongly, the average person given equal opportunities to have long hair, tattoos. wear opposite gender uniforms or ear piercings, in contravention of the current regulations, probably won't due to peer pressure or a desire to fully integrate. It's an easy win.

The rules and regulations should apply and be applied equally. Trouble is, they aren't and it will continue to make a farce out of equality and diversity and inclusion in the truest sense for the majority until inclusion and equality applies equally.

The danger, as the Army are now finding, is in the scrabble to appease the minorities,. the majorities (from whom we recruit most) are getting a bit hacked off with the glaring inconsistencies.
 
Last edited:
#19
W
U
But including promoting inclusivity in sjars for consideration at a promotion board does not mean ignoring leadership, intelligence, job ability, qualifications. It just means that a good candidate will not be considered good enough if they are inclined to prejudice towards certain minority groups and will be seen in an even better light if they can show active steps to promote a workplace where every individual is treated with respect, regardless.
Would all of the above not be considered when assesing the ' merit' of the prospective canditate for promotion? In the PC world we live in these days, I would have thought that was a given. Thank Christ I'm retired....:)
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#20
There are plenty of examples of people "passed over" for promotion for not championing D&I. One example is a guy quoted on national news stating "Any country that sends it's women to war is morally corrupt". He was a "Two and Half" then, still serving and the same rank then as he is now, decades later.

Interestingly, ageism is still active in the Armed Forces and due to crown exemption, a devisive management tool despite the fact that it should be justified in every instance it is applied. Example? You cannot join as a Warfare Officer if aged over 25, but can join as a Warfare Rating up to your 37th birthday.
 

Latest Threads

Top