The UCI's Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity Boneheaded Approach to Safety

Posted By CotoBlogzz

Rancho Santa Margarita, CA- We continue to make the argument that public sector unions are not only an anachronism but also a major contributor to the country’s malaise.  Further, we make the argument that private sector unions are not bad.  However, politicians, lobbyists and parasitic bureaucracies have  bastardized the movement so much so, that the current approach to labor is economically and politically unsustainable.

While there is no known antibiotic to treat the CP-Virus, a symbiotic relationship between unions, lobbyists, parasitic bureaucracies and politicians, we continue to suggest that a way forward is to eliminate 80% of the mostly parasitic state and national  bureaucracies, such as OCTA, LAFCO, CLRC, DOE, EEOC, EPA and so on.  The notion is not getting traction in certain Tea Party circles.

The  UCI's  Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity Boneheaded Approach to Safety is a perfect illustration of what parasitic bureaucracies tend to do:  Instead of looking at the cause of the problem, it focuses on the effect – as the latter is more consistent with the self-preservation instinct.  The UC Irvine Risk Management, in its own words, “ is committed to reducing “the Cost of Risk” through a variety of training and loss prevention programs…,”  targeting

• Auto Liability/Physical Damage
• General Liability
• Property Damage
• Employment Practices

The  UCI's  Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity (OEOD) argues that “..at UCI Spanish speaking employees represent a significant portion of the custodial and dining services staff: however, many of the supervisors of those employees do not speak Spanish.  The linguistic and cultural disconnect can lead to misunderstandings that results in grievances including allegations of discrimination and sexual harassment.”   Its solution is to spend taxpayers' money teaching supervisors Spanish and Latino culture.

This approach is boneheaded for many reasons: a)   Instead of looking at the root cause, the OEOD proposes to tackle the effect, at taxpayers’ expense.   Why not require that any and all UCI employees speak English? If for whatever reason this is not possible, why not put the onus on the employee to learn the language?

 b)  Apparently the OEOD is not aware of the old adage:  “give a man a fish versus teaching a man to fish”  What the OEOD is doing in this case is analogous to treating a drug addict, by simply giving him more drugs.  Makes him that much more dependent on the system.  Why not instead, make it a requirement for employment to have all non-English speakers assimilate not only the culture, but the language as well, for instance.

c)  Has anyone at the OEOD  noticed the nation is on the border of a double-dip recession?

We are asking Gecole Harley, the person submitting the funding request on behalf of the OEOD to let us know the error of our ways,