This article is about a government agency that deliberately used race over merit. The documents show that a merit-based test (of cognitive ability) was scrapped because too many black people failed. It was replaced with a point system, based on biographical data, where a lower grade in high school science improved an applicant's odds of being hired.

Regardless of what is true about "most organizations", the FAA engaged in a deliberately racist scheme to exclude the most qualified people if they are an undesirable race.

You seem to be responding to a specific example of a federal agency engaging in racism by saying that most organizations are not that way. How does that make this instance acceptable? Given the long period of time the government has been getting away with it, how do you know most organizations are not quietly doing the same thing?

Yes, if you define the role you are hiring for as one where the applicant would have failed science in high school you will be hiring the most qualified applicant if they failed science in high school.

But how is failing science in high school good for working on aviation safety?

If they are qualified, shouldn't they be able to compete fairly with the rest of the applicant pool? I think this scenario should only be a cause for concern if people are being passed on for anything other than their competency, such as race.

> most organisations do not _hire_ using DEI over merit

Scientific study needed.

There's a reason we use double blind studies; there are many biases that can influence results. I'd bet a pretty penny that most organizations ARE hiring DEI over merit, they may simply not be doing so explicitly.

If you're "collecting candidate pools based on diversity", you're not going to convince me that you aren't biasing your hiring in some way. https://xkcd.com/463/