EU Immigration and the challenges of 'non-discriminatory' choices..

Today I showed a couple of prospective tenants around a house as a favour for the owner (a guy I've known for a few years), and basically whoever I recommended was going to get the place.
The two blokes were pretty much the same, both hard working guys in building/construction (as I am), both with decent references, both having a partner and small child, and both who my gut instinct shouted "decent people".
I couldn't separate the two in any way, and would have happily rented a place to both of them, but I had to make a decision when asked "Who are you going with?" by the owner - so I went with the British guy over the Eastern European one.

I know there are probably 'anti-discrimination' laws which would love to have a field day with my honesty here, but it was a private gentleman's agreement with me doing the interview/choice of tenant, so rant on about whatever legislation you like but there is no chance of a prosecution against me in this situation.

The ongoing issue of EU workers/unemployed living in the UK is obviously current at the moment with upcoming EU Parliament elections, and to be fair I've enjoyed working with many Eastern Europeans over the last few years, so I don't automatically have any problem with individuals such as myself taking advantage of whatever geo-political framework we all have to deal with. But...I found myself in a position where I could see no difference between two guy's I liked, aside from the fact that one of them was born on the same island as me, so I went with him.

Now, the law may say that I was discriminatory because my decision was eventually based on nationality alone. I have no issue with race/gender/citizenship/whatever, but when I had to pick between two blokes who i liked equally, it went down to the guy who had the same passport as me.

I'm interested in the thoughts of others here, but I would like to focus on the decisions people make regardless of whatever equality/EU laws decree how we should make our choices. The reality is human imperfection and subjectivity, so regarding my choice today, I don't see any way we can realistically legislate against choosing our fellow citizens over foreign nationals.
I surprised myself today, first time I've wilfully been preferential to someone because we happened to be born under the same enforced flag.

Are you sure the decision you made was just for nationality alone, what about familiarity and uncertainty in direction or the other ?

a reply to: dollukka
Interesting question. I'm still mulling all my thoughts over, and my uncertainty is probably why I started this topic to invite input.
I found familiarity with both blokes...as fellow working blokes..and just, well..being blokes.
I liked both equally but only one was born on the same island as me...and the other guy had a passport issued by a different gang which I have no membership of (gang/government). As human beings yep yep same same...just by default of birth I only shared membership of the same gang with one of them.

*Edit*
If our societies collapsed tomorrow there will be a local gang which will win control. Right now in the UK the ruling gang is the folk who issue the passports...

I don't see where there is any problem. Imagine they were both British and one happened to be from your home town. You could just as easy pick him just based on he is from your home town.

Would it not be discrimination to vote against the British guy strictly for being British?

a reply to: grainofsand

Many people are simply economic migrants and, if offered better wages would be off like a shot. My son is a plumber gas engineer and he still occasionally gets called out to fix work done by foreigners. I had to have an Xray the other day and the guy could hardly speak English and it took so long because he kept going to get another radiographer to check what he was doing. Those are two bad examples but, how do you know your tenant is actually qualified to do the job he claims to do. In fairness many people are well qualified and extremely good at their work, but vetting for a 6 month tenancy or longer, you can't exactly check their work qualifications if they have only just arrived. Its harder when you are doing a vetting job for someone else.

Like you I would have gone for the UK guy simply because he would have had roots here and so less likely to up and go. Also some people get homesick and again up and go back to where they came from, so could break the tenancy early.

I don't see your concern, unless you heart render over the emotional issue of immigration as opposed to the likely best settled tenant for the landlord.

Well I'm Eastern European and I still totally agree with you.
Most people out of "political correctness" would do the opposite ( And such choice just doesn't make sense. Of course you'd chose someone who you feel is closer to you), they never notice the irony of their "non-discrimination" - It's still discrimination and the type of discrimination "big brother" is trying (Quite successfully) to brainwash us into considering normal. Anything against the majority and against our own interest "can't be" discrimination and is considered good.

@tinner07 - I agree. I think my observations or concern is that with such strict anti-discriminatory rules in place these days it seems we cannot make a judgement on nationality alone. I've offered work to EU nationals over Brit guys I know a few times in the past, when I've known the work of both of them and the EU national won with reliability and effort.
This situation I could see no difference between the two so the Brit got it.

@Shiloh7 - Nicely put. The 'most settled' question is hard to guess or assume based on nationality though. The landlord has loads of properties, and some EU nationals have stayed in the same places for years with no hassle, while some have done a moonlight flit out of the country with no notice. On the UK tenant side some have stayed years with no hassle while some have not paid rent or moved frequently, or even rinsed the places as drug farms with all the damage caused with venting and the like.

@mkpetrov - Thanks for the reply from your perspective. The 'closer to you thing' is of course why I chose the British guy. They were completely of equal merit in my opinion so I went with someone in the same gang as me. I could see nothing else to influence my decision.
I totally agree with your thoughts on governmental/societal sways towards "political correctness", it seems that my choice would most certainly be criticised by some campaigning groups for my 'choose the fellow countryman' stance.

...I have to say though, if I were in any EU country applying for a job or whatever, and the decision maker said to me that I had everything 'the other guy' had but they choose him because I was not from their country, I would have no problem with that at all. I wonder why is such a stance not 'allowed' any more. Is it not just human nature?