I assume, they are gonna sue those Chinese restaurants too?
U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
331–340 of 507 posts
Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure people with the right skills are being discriminated against if they aren't in one of the favored groups. There is also no quota for white people or men. In my company these groups seem pretty underrepresented in some departments. Maybe they should do blind tests like government often does.
White people are underrepresented at most large tech companies[1]. So is almost every other race. The exception is Asians. Asians are vastly overrepresented. I don't think this is a bad thing. It is meritocracy in action. But it violates the common notion that meritocracy and equality are the same thing. [1] http://www.unz.com/gnxp/silicon-valley-has-an-asian-people-p...
You're saying that Asians are more meritorious of positions at large tech companies than people of other ethnicities. That's an extraordinary claim.
By the way, if Asians comprise about 30% of the workforce in the Valley, I wouldn't say they're over-represented. They're probably under-represented, in fact.
Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately this isn't enough. Discriminatory rules such as "don't lend to any zip code that's over 75% black" will pass this test if you include this variable as a feature. The same logic applies to less obvious cases such as purchasing behavior.
While I agree that `P(loan | race=1, black_zip) = P(loan | race=2, black_zip) = 0` does indeed satisfy the condition, I think the kind of discrimination it creates is in some sense out of scope. This is because if P(loan | black_zip) is profitable > 0, any bank primarily motivated by profit will approve such loans. [this is the statement I believe you meant] If P(loan | black_zip) isn't profitable > 0 after correctin…
Of course if all banks do that, how is society to deal with this pit/failed neighborhood?
Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since graduating college I've stayed continuously employeed at several different Bay Area tech startups, so I'm pretty sure I have at least decent technology skills. Yet I've been to several interviews where questions about race/ethnicity were brought up (and I failed to get offers from those companies that ask such questions). I can only imagine what it's like being a woman going for these positions. My point, a lot…
How do questions of race and ethnicity come up in an interview? It's illegal to ask that and they can be sued so usually they're very careful to not touch the subject.
It's not illegal to ask about race; it's illegal to discriminate by race. Companies usually avoid asking such questions because they can be used as evidence of race-based discrimination should the candidate decide to sue. The same applies to other fedaral protected classed (sexual orientation, religion, etc)
Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
#335I feel that I can provide a small yet worthy piece of context. We have a difficult time interviewing ANYBODY for our open reqs. And like every other technology company I've ever worked at; a majority of resume's I've reviewed had Indian names. This seems especially weighted given how the Oracle brand and database are still desirable properties and tech in India. Your average white dude in Silicon Valley may have a fa…
In the full complaint [1] the DoL mentions this. "Moreover, comparisons between available applicants from national labor data and Oracle's hires show gross and statistically significant disparities in the hiring of Asians versus non-Asians into PT1 and Product Development positions at Oracle Redwood Shores. These comparisons are particularly relevant because Oracle's applicant pool was heavily over-represented by Asi…
"referral bonuses that encouraged its heavily Asian workforce to recruit other Asians"
Every technology company I have worked at used referral bonuses to find qualified applicants. This common recruiting practice is now considered discriminatory by the DoL if a company's workforce is "heavily Asian?" Unbelievable.
Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
#336That means we so far have: * Palantir sued for not hiring enough Asians [0] * Google sued for not turning over compensation data [1] * Oracle sued for hiring too many Asians While it's possible that discriminatory processes have happened at all these places, it seems these lawsuits can be targeted at whoever one wishes. It's always going to be possible to find data that indicates discrimination, unless companies hire…
When you say, "...lawsuits can be targeted at whoever one wishes" it is evident that you are male, white. A bit of background on who and why may help...
It is the Federal government suing these companies. Blame Obama. But not to worry, Trump will redeem male whites.
Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
The prevailing wage comes from a chart: you don't just do research or come up with it. Figuring out which prevailing wage to use among the existing job descriptions is already a matter of judgement, and you can just aim for the low one. Publishing the position locally is easily skirted: It's not published in places that people look at, it's not written in a way that makes it sound appealing, and often has some nonsen…
Thank you for your insightful comment - I wish people like you would testify in front of congress on the abuses of the H1B process that are clearly widespread. It's depressing to think about the stress and anxiety this might cause someone who is literally facing deportation if he doesn't "suck it up" and keep working at a sweat shop for the same salary they were hired at 5+ years ago.
I'm on an H-1B, and the thing that infuriates me about the dialogue on this is that they are effectively trying to ban skilled immigration, and exclude people like me from coming.
If you don't qualify for the family-based or refugee route, employment-based immigration is the only viable pathway. The amount of hate I see piled on people trying to come here via the employment-based immigration seems insane to me. These people make it seem like employment-based immigration is not as respectable or legitimate, compared to refugee/asylum and family-based immigration.
The problem with requiring higher wagers is that for people like me, who were students in US -- it's very hard to get an ultra-high salary for the first job out of college. I was a student (on an F-1 visa), and my first job out of college offered me $60,000/year. On my first job on my H-1B visa (in NYC), I was offered $85,000 a year (got slightly over $100,000 with bonuses). Then, just about a year and half later, I was paid (mostly through lucky bonuses) slightly over $200,000 in a single year.
If you raised wage requirements, you'd basically be not allowing people like me to continue to stay and work in the US (after graduation from college), and would instead only allow people from outside who have lots of experience (and skill) and can command a much higher salary upfront.
Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's always going to be possible to find data that indicates discrimination, unless companies hire in exact quotas (which would also be discriminatory really). There already are off-the-record quotas. Who in management hasn't heard discussion at least eluding the the need for a diversity hire? Probably very few people at this point. I believe a distinction must be made: Equality of opportunity is good. Equality of o…
I've been in software for ~10yrs now and can only count the number of engineers I've met who weren't white or Asian (Indians included) on one hand. And that doesn't say anything about anyone's particular ability to be engineers. It's just less likely to happen via the available applicants. Although I have noticed a spike in women, that doesn't seem to be the issue here. It seems to me the Dept of Labor is trying to s…
I do agree, and this is what makes the Palantir case makes sense.
If I see a large software company located in an area where a lot of Asians reside and there aren't many Asians there? Then something funny is going on.
Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's always going to be possible to find data that indicates discrimination, unless companies hire in exact quotas (which would also be discriminatory really). There already are off-the-record quotas. Who in management hasn't heard discussion at least eluding the the need for a diversity hire? Probably very few people at this point. I believe a distinction must be made: Equality of opportunity is good. Equality of o…
You know what, though? If we actually had equality of opportunity, it doesn't seem like we'd see the kind of disparity we do. Certainly not at a big corporation where there should be enough of an employee pool to have it at least somewhat reflect the general population of the region. But then, when I listen to the stories women in tech (for example) tell, and they do tell a LOT of the same stories, it's clear we're p…
Could blind hiring practices be a solution to the absence of equal opportunity? Or quotas are a better answer? What in your opinion can be done to battle hiring discrimination problem?
Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since graduating college I've stayed continuously employeed at several different Bay Area tech startups, so I'm pretty sure I have at least decent technology skills. Yet I've been to several interviews where questions about race/ethnicity were brought up (and I failed to get offers from those companies that ask such questions). I can only imagine what it's like being a woman going for these positions. My point, a lot…
How do questions of race and ethnicity come up in an interview? It's illegal to ask that and they can be sued so usually they're very careful to not touch the subject.
It's not illegal to ask about race, but, asking about race is a good indication you are discriminating based on race, which is illegal.
As to why they do it? I'm guessing that they either don't know not to bring up race or they don't care about discriminating based on race because they probably won't have any consequences.
I've seen plenty of casual workplace sexism and racism in my life. It happens.