Tinisha Agramonte Named Chief Diversity Officer of The Walt Disney Company

Drdcm

Drdcm

Well-Known Member
Take this for what you want it to be.

I’ve been on selection committee for both medical school and residency. I can say without a doubt that there is no dirth of highly qualified minority applicants that we give offers to. It has never come down to accepting someone who is less qualified due to their ethnicity or background. The applicants are virtually identical at that point, all have similar grades, all have similar volunteer experience, all have similar letters of recommendation. If given the choice of qualified applicants, I’m hands down going to go for someone who has been brought up with a different perspective because that brings a different way of thinking and therefore value to a team.

There were no highly qualified white men losing out on jobs to under qualified minorities. If anything, those applicants are average at best in qualifications and that’s why someone else was selected - because they bring more to the table.

The hard part wasn’t finding and interviewing great applicants, it was not being able to recruit them after making the offer, which happened 9/10 times because the ended up somewhere better.

Edit: also diversity comes in many forms. A low income rural white guy vs an urban affluent white guy bring different qualities and perspectives as well.
 
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
TsWade2 said:
Even though I’m hoping she’s not a political activist like LaTondra Newton, I’m giving Tinisha a fair chance. And I hope she does that in a respectful way.
Click to expand...
Applicants regardless of level and racial background tell the interviewer and future bosses during the hiring process what they want to hear to get the job. That's logic 101.
 
Last edited:
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
el_super said:
They cannot be apolitical. Being political can be what you say, but it can also be what you DO NOT say. If there is a middle ground to be had, Disney was already there.



Wasn't Elemental about diversity too?
Click to expand...
One way to attract a more diverse audience is create Black Panther Land at WDW. Iger was one of the few execs that was very supportive of Black Panther and green lighted it to make it happen and the rest was history.
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Drdcm said:
Take this for what you want it to be.

I’ve been on selection committee for both medical school and residency. I can say without a doubt that there is no dirth of highly qualified minority applicants that we give offers to. It has never come down to accepting someone who is less qualified due to their ethnicity or background. The applicants are virtually identical at that point, all have similar grades, all have similar volunteer experience, all have similar letters of recommendation. If given the choice of qualified applicants, I’m hands down going to go for someone who has been brought up with a different perspective because that brings a different way of thinking and therefore value to a team.

There were no highly qualified white men losing out on jobs to under qualified minorities. If anything, those applicants are average at best in qualifications and that’s why someone else was selected - because they bring more to the table.

The hard part wasn’t finding and interviewing great applicants, it was not being able to recruit them after making the offer, which happened 9/10 times because the ended up somewhere better.

Edit: also diversity comes in many forms. A low income rural white guy vs an urban affluent white guy bring different qualities and perspectives as well.
Click to expand...
…wait…you’re an ACTUAL doctor?

🤯
 
C

Cliff

Well-Known Member
This is an extremely toxic subject, loaded with emotions, triggering, safe spaces, wide ranging points of view, potential accusations and finger pointing and tons of politics and very STRONG disagreements.



With this subject...the potential for forum member hurt feelings is extremely high and dangerous. I predict it will be removed completely in the near future???
 
Last edited:
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Cliff said:
This is an extremely toxic subject, loaded with emotions, triggering, safe spaces, wide ranging points of view, potential accusations and finger pointing and tons of politics and very STRONG disagreements.



With this subject...the potential for forum member hurt feeling is extremely high and dangerous. I predict it will be removed completely in the near future???
Click to expand...
Well…it is Disney news

And we should be able to handle this…chi tells us all the time that humans can handle themselves (evidence to the contrary for 6,000 years 😎)…

…but a matter of time until Mom has to clean up the mess 🧹
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Drdcm

Drdcm

Well-Known Member
TsWade2 said:
I’m not being toxic, I’m telling the truth and making common sense. Bob Iger says he’s going to quiet down the noise and he says he’s going to make sure it’s more entertainment driven than a political agenda driven. I don’t know much Tinisha and I hope she’s not a political activist, but if Drdcm says that she is really good and More understanding than LaTondra Newton, I’ll give her a fair chance.
Click to expand...
Just let it play and see how it goes.

It’s been over a decade since I worked with her, and a lot has changed including the concept of DEI and what it means. Like I said, she was solution focused back then.

I think she’s better suited for the position because she has actually had to work with others in a very bureaucratic and complex system for many years. Her previous roles have been on DEI, she’s an OG. Latonya, on the other hand, was primarily involved in philanthropy, which is very different by nature. You don’t typically rise through the ranks in a position like this by burning bridges and making enemies.

Things may be different now, but her role is obviously going to focus on improving engagement with certain groups of people… that’s just what the job is and always has been. Whether that pans out in ways that are ok with you depends on what you’re looking for.

Edit: you’ll notice from my post history I don’t normally wade into this kind of stuff. But when I heard it was her, I had to give her props because she did a good job when I knew her.
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Drdcm said:
Just let it play and see how it goes.

It’s been over a decade since I worked with her, and a lot has changed including the concept of DEI and what it means. Like I said, she was solution focused back then.

I think she’s better suited for the position because she has actually had to work with others in a very bureaucratic and complex system for many years. Her previous roles have been on DEI, she’s an OG. Latonya, on the other hand, was primarily involved in philanthropy, which is very different by nature. You don’t typically rise through the ranks in a position like this by burning bridges and making enemies. Especially within the govt where you can get axed from leadership positions the second the political winds shift.

Things may be different now, but her role is obviously going to focus on improving engagement with certain groups of people… that’s just what the job is and always has been. Whether that pans out in ways that are ok with you depends on what you’re looking for.

Edit: you’ll notice from my post history I don’t normally wade into this kind of stuff. But when I heard it was her, I had to give her props because she did a good job when I knew her.
Click to expand...

The last one worked for Toyota and doesn’t appear to have any business being near what they put her near…

…I’ll be interested to see how the replacement does?
 
T

TsWade2

Well-Known Member
Drdcm said:
Just let it play and see how it goes.

It’s been over a decade since I worked with her, and a lot has changed including the concept of DEI and what it means. Like I said, she was solution focused back then.

I think she’s better suited for the position because she has actually had to work with others in a very bureaucratic and complex system for many years. Her previous roles have been on DEI, she’s an OG. Latonya, on the other hand, was primarily involved in philanthropy, which is very different by nature. You don’t typically rise through the ranks in a position like this by burning bridges and making enemies. Especially within the govt where you can get axed from leadership positions the second the political winds shift.

Things may be different now, but her role is obviously going to focus on improving engagement with certain groups of people… that’s just what the job is and always has been. Whether that pans out in ways that are ok with you depends on what you’re looking for.

Edit: you’ll notice from my post history I don’t normally wade into this kind of stuff. But when I heard it was her, I had to give her props because she did a good job when I knew her.
Click to expand...
Okay. If you insist. I’ll give her a fair chance.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom