An iterviewee who brings race into the discussion clearly doesn't understand work/personal boundries and is going to be a liability.
It's a super softball question that gives that gives the interviewer a chance to brag about any small advancements they've recently made.
In 2022, if a hiring manager didn't have a decent response to this question locked and loaded, it would be a super red flag.
I'll "keep my political beliefs outside the work environment" when it's no longer political to say that
- Women, queer people, and minorities should be hired, treated, and paid the same as straight cis white men
- Abusive and exploitative treatment of workers is unacceptable
- Every human being deserves to be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of where they are on a corporate org chart
You say people should "keep their political beliefs outside the work environment" as if the managers, directors, C-suite, etc aren't imposing their political beliefs on us every moment of every day.
No they should not. They should be paid similar to someone with similar work experience, skills, potential and likability. It has nothing to do with someone's skin color or sexual orientation.
Unless, there’s something unexpressed in either of those.
For instance, a more or less official/understood work policy not being effectively equal regarding skills, in hiring, because of (un)acknowledged bias. Or, an understated motive to do more than only fair hiring or affirmative action to counter a acknowledged bias in hiring.
You are violently agreeing.
For most companies it isn't at all. They consentrate on issues relevant to staying competitive in the market.
I agree that actual cases of discrimination should be addressed and corrected.
Putting forth the ideology that "people" are "imposing their political beliefs on us every moment of every day" says more about you than it does anyone else.
Because that's exactly what you are doing.
Both in the company own market, because it WILL impact the company own teams and governance in the long run, if only in comparison with other companies,
AND in the employment "market", because the company is cutting itself off of a significant talent pool.
2. That’s precisely the (indirect) point. An interviewee that brings this question WANTS to be seen as a liability by a team/manager that understand the question as a “outside-of-work-boundaries-political-belief, and WANTS to understand how a diverse team articulates the answer.
I had a weird interview last year. After about 30 minutes talk, the guy started shifting to politics and expressing his ideas about Europe, the UK, refugees, etc. I didn't want the job anyway so I told him that I don't agree with his (barely contained) right wing opinions. He immediately told me that things are not going to work, and I agreed.
Having early 20 somethings doing interviews alone is asking for trouble. Talking about politics during an interview strikes me as a recipe for disaster by creating a highly homogeneous environment. I like variety
If that’s political, well, work _is_ political too (and even work organization becomes quickly political).
Healthy work issues are centered around whatever's going to help the company succeed. People want coworkers who produce and are positive. It affects everybody's livelihood.
That's the whole point. Cutting oneself out of society, being a person or a group, has never been a good idea in the long run.