‘Pale, male and stale’ should not be discarded

He is quoted as saying: ‘Avoiding pale, male and stale will ensure better decisions to drive business success and innovation.’

My husband, and many other men of a similar age, are obviously those to whom he is referring.

I think it is fair to say that this group of men have worked very hard for many years and many are still working very hard, and have contributed in no small way to the success of the finance industry in Guernsey and have paid, and many continue to pay, considerable amounts of tax.

To suggest that their decisions may not have been the best decisions or have not helped drive business success and that their decisions are no longer valued or business will somehow be more successful without their input is insulting and is at odds with his comment that ‘people matter and organisations must ensure their people management does not put any group at a disadvantage’.

Surely, by effectively discarding and even scorning this group, who have years of valuable experience to contribute, they are clearly being discriminated against and have become a ‘group at a disadvantage’ purely because of their sex, colour and age. This would seem to be somewhat of a contradiction.

Claiming that ‘better’ decisions will be made without these men suggests that this group has not always made good decisions. Where is the evidence for this?

It would be interesting to hear how Gavin St Pier thinks the new equalities law will ‘reap dividends in Guernsey’. How? Surely the island needs the best person for the job, regardless of sex, colour, age or disability, not the person who helps tick a box for ‘diversity’?

DEE DEE MORGAN,

L’Ancresse.