Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

secure.dahladmin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 68 posts

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#21

Post by blauditore »

mike_hearn wrote: post #19
jedmeyers wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read that being rejected at a committee level happens relatively infrequent. Did they hint to what might be the reason for rejection at such a late stage?

It happens all the time. The first couple of interviews are just a phone screen. After the on-sites the packet goes to a committee, always, which makes the final decision having read all the feedbacks from all the interviews. The hiring committee isn't some last moment check/balance, it's the primary way hiring decisions are made. Or at least that's how it worked when I was an interviewer at Google.

When I applied one year ago, my recruiter reviewed feedback of on-site interviews before passing it to the committee (which she decided not to do in my case).

From what I understand, reruiters are rated based on the quality of candidates they pass to the hiring committee, so they have an incentive to only let the best pass.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#22

Post by blauditore »

Regardless of whether it's justified or not, can someone explain how age discrimination could be proofed in such a case? Especially in this quickly evolving industry, Google may always find arguments like "candidate A had never worked with XY, but candidate B had, so we took B" to explain decisions.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#23

Post by muse900 »

blauditore wrote: post #22

Regardless of whether it's justified or not, can someone explain how age discrimination could be proofed in such a case? Especially in this quickly evolving industry, Google may always find arguments like "candidate A had never worked with XY, but candidate B had, so we took B" to explain decisions.

Am not a lawyer.

My closest guess is that this lawfirm is going to provide an X amount of cases that passed screening etc and have relevant experience to the job as described in its advertisement.

Then its really up to the Judge and the jury if such a case has a jury to decide.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#25

Post by tr1ck5t3r »

howawaygoog wrote: post #2

just got email for this, I did interview for Google and I'm over 40, (wonder how they got my info). I passed the interview but was shut down at the committee, very much doubt that age was a factor.

Age is a factor. Young people whilst educated highly are still very naive when it comes to thinking through the implications of their actions, so they are easy to manipulate and have them produce some nefarious dual use tech.

In fact I would go so far to suggest that someone in their 40's has learnt enough about the ways of the world to know alot better the differences in the rights and wrongs of the world. In other words, you are set up to fail if you follow the traditional educational route.

However its also worth pointing out, the age old problem of spotting giftedness. Einstein was mediocre at school and during his early year's at Uni, in fact it wasnt until his 30's that he started to come up with decent theories, so alot of companies hinder their growth & innovation potential by recruiting youngsters fresh out of an educational establishment.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#26

Post by matt4077 »

blauditore wrote: post #22

Regardless of whether it's justified or not, can someone explain how age discrimination could be proofed in such a case? Especially in this quickly evolving industry, Google may always find arguments like "candidate A had never worked with XY, but candidate B had, so we took B" to explain decisions.

The US legal system has this interesting "discovery phase" where the parties basically get to request all possibly relevant data from the other side. They'll try to find incriminating mails or other documents.

They could also work with statistics. Google being google, they most certainly have enormous amounts of data on their recruitment process. I'd even bet Google has algorithms to uncover discrimination in its hiring – biases are bad for business, after all. They may not have had age discrimination on their radar, but whatever they have on race/gender/dog-vs-cat-owners should be easily adaptable.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#27

Post by golemotron »

Beltiras wrote: post #20
vemv wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be happy to not use those services. Generally, commerce/work is a voluntary exchange between two willing parts, not a right. Most forms of real discrimination have become extinct; now a significant % of cases (at least in the IT world) it just a bunch of complainers.

Sounds like privilege talking. I'm a middle-aged white male. I try to stay mindful of my privilege when others explain perceived wrongs.

It takes extraordinary privilege to even conceive of the idea of privilege. Everyone else just lives their lives.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#28

Post by pzh »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #4
howawaygoog wrote: post #2

just got email for this, I did interview for Google and I'm over 40, (wonder how they got my info). I passed the interview but was shut down at the committee, very much doubt that age was a factor.

Always an interesting choice, the upside if you join is you get some money if the suit is settled, I presume the only downside is that you pretty much won't ever be employed there ever if they have paid out a legal settlement check to you. (It turns out it isn't illegal not to hire based on previously being sued by someone). I doubt they would be forced to hire you if they settle. (which would be a huge downside in m…

> It turns out it isn't illegal not to hire based on previously being sued by someone.

I thought there were laws to prevent Google from retaliating against somebody who sued them, and it would be illegal for them to not hire you on that basis alone...

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#29

Post by grzm »

golemotron wrote: post #27
Beltiras wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like privilege talking. I'm a middle-aged white male. I try to stay mindful of my privilege when others explain perceived wrongs.

It takes extraordinary privilege to even conceive of the idea of privilege. Everyone else just lives their lives.

A similar comparison can be made with respect to a lot of specialist fields or esoterica. For people using the internet as consumers, concepts like the CAP theorem aren't going to be something they would just stumble across: it would take interest in the field and concentrated study. It doesn't say anything about the validity of the concept, either for or against.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#30

Post by Klockan »

jedmeyers wrote: post #6
howawaygoog wrote: post #2

just got email for this, I did interview for Google and I'm over 40, (wonder how they got my info). I passed the interview but was shut down at the committee, very much doubt that age was a factor.

I've read that being rejected at a committee level happens relatively infrequent. Did they hint to what might be the reason for rejection at such a late stage?

About 80% gets rejected at the committee stage, it is the executive review after the committee that rarely rejects.
Post reply on HN