The answer to this of you hear someone say this earnestly is: Why would they have a slightly lower GPA? If anything usually when equally qualified candidates go head to head the white person still has a statistical advantage, even with organizations that have DEI in their mission. This would imply people in disadvantaged groups usually have to be more qualified to get hired.
Despite the down votes I suspect most linguists would agree with you as they generally disagree with prescriptivism. Language is fluid and ever changing. Many of the phrases we have that have survived hundreds of years have altered and changed many times over to fit the era. Many linguists believe language always alters towards efficiency over time. Staunchly insisting people continue to use things in the original way is just classism disguised as education. Ironically, yours was the more educated comment in here, imo.
IIRC: He helped close down the poorest school in his city district instead of funding and fixing it. Championed broken windows policing that in part led to things like George Floyd and poor people I know getting massive fines for things like chipped paint on their house, leading to foreclosures and a debtors system with the city. Worked to kick out small businesses in favor of corporate chains. Tried to push poor people into neighboring districts and suburbs. Etc. Nothing he ever put his hands on helped people. I think it was very likely he was being paid under the table by business interests to do this stuff. If not, he is still a royal piece of shit.
When the revolution comes, he’s on the short list of people to punch in the face.
Don Samuels is a corrupt garbage human, it should never have been that close regardless of your view of our Israel policy.
If someone hired someone provably less qualified that would be easy grounds for a discrimination lawsuit. The problem is actually usually the opposite. People from disadvantaged groups often have to work way harder and be way more qualified just to be treated equally in society.
DEI isn’t about who we hire and fire specifically but about how we as a society of institutions act overall. People in DEI might review the hiring and firing practices more holistically as one part of their job. Possibly focusing on recruiting practices including all communities (who are you advertising the job to?), job descriptions being simplified and more honest to what is actually required (broadening who qualifies), training hiring and firing authorities about unconscious bias, etc. That enables them to follow the eeoc laws and truly hire people that are most qualified while having a more representative candidate pool, resulting in a more representative group of employees. When you’re correcting your hiring practices to be more equitable, you don’t need to hire people less qualified.
DEI would also be how they are treated once there, how the organization treats their staff in a fair and equitable manner. How current policies and processes can be changed to remove structural bias. How to best utilize a broad range of perspectives to improve your organization. For business often how you can include a broader range of targets to market to, etc. Analyzing the structure as a whole for institutional bias. That’s all DEI.
The right has perverted the concept of DEI to make people believe unqualified people are landing positions when that’s not what DEI is even there for.