What about top universities discriminating against Asian applicants? In many states, affirmative action is legally denying opportunities for Asian Americans.
U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
31–40 of 415 posts
Re: U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
#32The part that doesn't make sense to me is... what does Palantir have to gain by discriminating? The other way this happens is by cultural biases causing discrimination, but not intentionally with some specific goal in mind. I'm operating only on anecdotes, but in the tech industry, discriminating against Asians at the intern/ground level seems to be a non-issue. Maybe different story when you get to management, and m…
I have no idea, but just a random guess:
If you try to sell a lot of secret spying services to the government (which I think Palantir does?), they probably think it helps if your employees don't look/sound Chinese, seeing as the government might be afraid of China's espionage efforts.
I also don't know how much trouble they have getting clearance for someone that grew up in China compared to other countries.
(again: I have no idea, that's just a random guess)
Re: U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
#33Who cares? If the Asians are equally qualified as whites then they are only hurting themselves by excluding them. And they aren't really excluding them. They still hire vastly more Asians than expected by the proportion of general population.
> Who cares?
The government, because its a violation of an executive order that applies to all government contracting, and Palantir is a government contractor. (Hence why one of the proposed remedies is cancelling all of Palantir's government contracts and subcontracts, and banning them from future contracting.)
> If the Asians are equally qualified as whites then they are only hurting themselves by excluding them.
If they are only equally (and not more) qualified, and they have to narrow the pool anyway to get a manageable pool for later stages of the hiring process, then they actually aren't hurting themselves, before considering the consequences of enforcement actions like this one.
Re: U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
#34In one example cited by the Labor Department, Palantir reviewed a pool of more than 130 qualified applicants for an engineering intern position, about 73 percent of whom were Asian. The lawsuit, which covers Palantir's conduct between January 2010 and the present, said the company hired 17 non-Asian applicants and four Asians. "The likelihood that this result occurred according to chance is approximately one in a bil…
This is 100% a political move. The number of people hired matches the national average, which is what is usually used to determine "diversity". Honestly, there is no reason this lawsuit should be pressed. As you pointed out I'm sure there were visa's required for some applicants, and 20% Asian is still good by percentage.
Do we know that the non-Asians also didn't require visas?
Also, I find it interesting how national average always seems to justify discrimination against Asians when it comes to jobs/college acceptance but then if someone brings up how Asians can be under-represented in things like media representation or politics, some people will say it's because there aren't many Asians who go into acting/modeling/politics.
Re: U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
#35When was the last time U.S. regulators reviewed the percentage of 'asians' in companies like Infosys and WiPro? And who exactly qualifies as an 'Asian' applicant? Does a person born, say, in Israel qualifies as one?
Re: U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
#36How does the Department of Labor determine the applicants' qualifications?
[deleted]
Re: U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
#37How does the Department of Labor determine the applicants' qualifications?
Palantir is a government contractor. In this case there's a whole Compliance department that can be involved in audits of hiring practices.
https://www.dol.gov/ofccp/aboutof.html
In this case I'd assume based on resumes.
Re: U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
#38I bet it's more subtle than overt (not an excuse if it's happening, of course, merely a possible explanation)... probably managers hiring unaware they're hiring people whom look like them, rather than hiring the most skilled and capable people whom fit with the company culture. I've seen this at a number of universities and enterprise shops when there's not a conscious effort to minimize useless bias.
> I bet it's more subtle than overt (not an excuse if it's happening, of course, merely a possible explanation)... probably managers hiring unaware they're hiring people whom look like them
Actually, from the government filing, it sounds like they are saying a big part of it is very active, through the heavy reliance on an employee referral program.
Re: U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
And if ratio hired matched ratio applied, then 73% of those hired would have been Asian and they could be accused of discrimination the other way.
And if ratio hired matched ratio applied, then 73% of those hired would have been Asian and they could be accused of discrimination the other way. If the ratio of those hired matches the ratio of applicants how does anyone make a complaint of discrimination?
You compare it to the general population. In disparate impact lawsuits, this is the 'applicant' vs 'pool' distinction; the idea is to make it possible to sue even when the discrimination 'barriers' operate before the formal application process, but of course, you wind up in Orwellian games where the necessary number of minority potential-employees simply do not exist and the employer is forced to provide a devil's proof to show they weren't being discriminatory and they argue over what 'proxies' are appropriate... Ward Cove and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazelwood_School_District_v._U...
Re: U.S. regulators accuse Palantir of bias against Asians
#40Who cares? If the Asians are equally qualified as whites then they are only hurting themselves by excluding them. And they aren't really excluding them. They still hire vastly more Asians than expected by the proportion of general population.
> Who cares? The government, because its a violation of an executive order that applies to all government contracting, and Palantir is a government contractor. (Hence why one of the proposed remedies is cancelling all of Palantir's government contracts and subcontracts, and banning them from future contracting.) > If the Asians are equally qualified as whites then they are only hurting themselves by excluding them. I…
Well obviously the government cares, I'm suggesting that they shouldn't.
And yes technically you are correct. But that assumes they are exactly equal. If you exclude a bunch of people for arbitrary reasons then you necessarily get worse results. Some of the best candidates may be excluded.