Are MPs who employ their family racist?
by Philip
Nothing like a controversial headline to stir debate.
There was an investigation into Massey Ferguson in Coventry in 1982 by the CRE, which found having informal recruitment mechanisms, via word of mouth, led to a homogenous workforce.Employees told their friends and family of vacancies. They then wrote in and got the job. As friends and family were usually of the same race, the workforce at Massey Ferguson replicated itself. Because of the informal recruitment processes the workforce was overwhelmingly white, whilst Coventry was and still is an ethnically mixed area. The record label Two Tone came out of Coventry, the workforce at Massey Ferguson could not be described as Two Tone, more like Vanilla Ice
The informal recruitment mechanism was found to be indirectly racially discriminatory.
Back to the point. If MPs are recruiting friends and family by informal recruitment mechanisms might they be inadvertently replicating the ethnic make up of the Commons? Could this be contrary to the Race Relations Act? Given that this is public money involved and some of this taxing work could be fitted around a full time degree course (and rumour has it a very active social life) , why can’t mps when they come to recruit office staff at least try to operate by a Code of Practice on Recruitment?
Guidance for how employers should recruit is being forever issued by various statutory bodies. Surely MPs don’t want to be accused of “Do as I say not do as I do!” do they?
I appreciate that the argument is more nuanced than the one advanced as there can be sound reasons for some philandering mps to have their spouse as secretary so that a watchful eye can be kept.
That pragmatic point aside, given that it is public money shouldn’t there be a transparent appointment mechanism?
Makes you think, dunnit?
Similar Posts:
