U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#341

Post by rifung » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 6:26 AM UTC

meanduck wrote: post #293

jdavis703 wrote: post #268

Earlier 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…

I am sure this has been mentioned to death. But I always find this contradictory. Companies cannot be soley profit driven if at same time they artifically reducing supply of eligable candidates. That makes no business sense. So if companies are rejecting someone that means as whole (read net), they are expecting more bang for the buck.

It's not as though the company is purposely discriminating though. People naturally discriminate and it takes conscious effort to stop yourself from doing so.

At least that's what I was told at the talk about diversity and inclusion during my orientation at one of those big tech companies.

Apparently it's because we benefited from being able to make quick judgments before civilized society was a thing.

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#342

Post by sangnoir » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 6:30 AM UTC

wallace_f wrote: post #256

Frondo wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>it doesn't seem like Unfortunately, in our political climate one side of this debate has people who can say, "it seems like" and that's it. "It seems like" [...] 'we have a huge problem of sexism and racism' and if you argue against that you're this evil monster, as you described: >most people [don't] even give a shit about equality of opportunity, even those who pay lip service to it. I think most people don't want…

> Women will always have longer lifespans and higher average IQs than men

Then why is it that on average they get paid less than men for the same job? Surely if they are inherently "smarter", they should be dominating the knowledge economy and earning more than men. The fact that they don't points to some greater opposing force that needs addressing.

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#343

Post by logandavis » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 6:32 AM UTC

omginternets wrote: post #269

logandavis wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Don't you believe that equality of opportunity would lead to equality of outcome (plus or minus random variation)? If not, what alternative result would you predict would arise from equality of opportunity, and why? 2) Don't you see how taking steps to correct towards equality of outcome leads towards equality of opportunity (by increasing the networking / financial / inspiration opportunities for disadvantaged gr…

>Don't you believe that equality of opportunity would lead to equality of outcome (plus or minus random variation)? Why should it? This reflects a very strong a priori position that people are exactly the same and don't systematically vary in their interests, cultural values, etc. Where's the positive evidence for this (latent, implicit) positive claim?

I suppose I simply hold some truths to be self-evident.

Sorry, sorry, too easy :P . To more seriously and substantively address your point, variance in cultural values in part constitutes inequality of opportunity, no? A culture that values such-and-such Silicon Valley principle less offers less opportunity for development of Silicon-Valley-hirable skills. And variance in interests is caused in part by inequality of opportunity, no? I might not have been interested in computer science if my scientist parents had not encouraged me at a young age.

So in response to my asking "wouldn't equality of opportunity lead to equality of outcome?", you have challenged me to defend the assertion that equality of opportunity exists. Which is not my assertion.

I will also note that it's very easy to call someone else's claim positive and Russell's Teapot them to death. The assertion that variation in the skills that make a good Oracle employee correlates with heritage could also be called a strong positive claim. (In fact, I see that poster sidlls has done just this, about twenty posts further down.)

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#344

Post by sangnoir » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 6:40 AM UTC

jimbokun wrote: post #281

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we actually had equality of opportunity, it doesn't seem like we'd see the kind of disparity we do. There are pieces of the system that don't have equality of opportunity. People aren't born with the same amount of money or into the same social circles. There are actual racists in the world doing actually racist things. Different role models. Different cultures. Everyone already knows this. You have to fix the c…

I was a white kid, and I wanted to be a basketball player much more than a programmer. I just wasn't any good at it.

What you are suggesting, but won't say explicitly is that the black kid who wants to be a CRUD developer won't be good at it; that's a rubbish argument.

The NBA is much smaller than entire industries: there are more CEOs than NBA players.

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#345

Post by rifung » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 6:40 AM UTC

garanduss wrote: post #186

FT_intern wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classifying East Asians and Indians in the same group is redundant to begin with. The difference in culture, languages, etc. between East Asian and Indian immigrants is much higher than the differences between white (European) and Hispanic immigrants and Americans. On that point, the entire racial taxonomy, especially when used in the context of "diversity in tech", is elementary and useless. The average black Americ…

No, they're just using a different definition of diversity. Many people oppose mass immigration for reasons other than xenophobia. Speaking personally, I found that work environments with lots of new or unamericanized immigrants had little collaboration, little in-office comraderie, and no socialization outside of work (e.g. pub nights). It was boring and I pined for a culturally American setting. Sometimes "multicul…

> Speaking personally, I found that work environments with lots of new or unamericanized immigrants had little collaboration, little in-office comraderie, and no socialization outside of work (e.g. pub nights). It was boring and I pined for a culturally American setting. Sometimes "multicultural" just means the subset of all cultures involved.

It sounds like you just wish they were more like you? Isn't this the kind of mentality that prevents diversity?

I actually hate when teams go to pubs because it just marginalizes people who can't/don't drink, god forbid there are any recovering alcoholics or people allergic to it.

While I can understand the frustration, I feel like you are in a position to get people to come together and feel more comraderie. After all, if these people are coming from other countries, their English is probably not that great, and it's likely difficult for them to communicate what they are thinking. I can see how they would want to go home and be able to speak in their native tongue, not to mention enjoy the things they used to.

It's our job to make them feel welcome and like they can express themselves in this country. Of course that's just my opinion and I'll admit I'm biased because I feel like I'm usually the one who doesn't fit in.

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#346

Post by tbrownaw » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 6:46 AM UTC

pippy wrote: post #150

freditup wrote: post #123

That 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…

This is why merit based evaluation is the only sane hiring practice. I'd love to see legal protection for companies that can provide evidence they strictly adhered to the merit based hires. You can also apply this rationale to your own projects, by including the Code of Merit into your projects[0][1]. [0] https://github.com/rosarior/Code-of-Merit/blob/master/CODE_O... [1] http://code-of-merit.org/

This is why merit based evaluation is the only sane hiring practice. I'd love to see legal protection for companies that can provide evidence they strictly adhered to the merit based hires.

Maybe something like that could work if we ever figure out how to consistently and accurately measure productivity. Assuming that productivity is in fact how you intend to measure "merit".

.

Also, from your link...

The project creators, lead developers, core team, constitute the managing members of the project and have final say in every decision of the project, technical or otherwise, including overruling previous decisions. There are no limitations to this decisional power.

Well, at least you're honest about being a dictatorship. :) OTOH, just saying doesn't make it so. Hostile forks are a thing, license changes without copyright assignment are not a thing, etc.

All members have the same opportunities to seek any challenge they want within the project.

Congratulations, you're biased in favor of people with more outgoing and assertive personalities. ;)

Authority or position in the project will be proportional to the accrued contribution. Seniority must be earned.

Proportional requires that contributions be quantifiable. I'm not aware of any accurate, objective way to do that. (If there was, it would also be a solution to the "how to measure productivity" problem.)

Software is evolutive: the better implementations must supersede lesser implementations. Technical advantage is the primary evaluation metric.

What does "technical advantage" include? Switching costs imposed on users? The level of skill required from contributors? IDE-computable code metrics?

This is a space for technical prowess; topics outside of the project will not be tolerated.

Non technical conflicts will be discussed in a separate space. Disruption of the project will not be allowed.

These sound like an excellent way to let the trees blind you to the forest.

Individual characteristics, including but not limited to, body, sex, sexual preference, race, language, religion, nationality, or political preferences are irrelevant in the scope of the project and will not be taken into account concerning your value or that of your contribution to the project.

So, there's no such thing as "reasonable accommodations"?

There is no room for ambiguity: Ambiguity will be met with questioning; further ambiguity will be met with silence. It is the responsibility of the originator to provide requested context.

Wow, working only on clearly-defined problems must be nice. What happens when the ambiguity is part of the problem space?

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#347

Post by nommm-nommm » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 6:47 AM UTC

wallace_f wrote: post #256

Frondo wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>it doesn't seem like Unfortunately, in our political climate one side of this debate has people who can say, "it seems like" and that's it. "It seems like" [...] 'we have a huge problem of sexism and racism' and if you argue against that you're this evil monster, as you described: >most people [don't] even give a shit about equality of opportunity, even those who pay lip service to it. I think most people don't want…

OK, I'll bite, why exactly do you believe women don't want the opportunity to work on oil rigs?

http://www.warrensiurek.com/blog/2015/04/5-women-claim-gende...

>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed a claim on behalf of five women against an oil drilling company in another state. According to the complaint, the women applied for jobs to work as floor hands on the oil rigs, but they were turned down. The women allegedly all had the proper qualifications to be able to perform the functions of the job.

>The women were allegedly told that females were not hired on the rig because it was populated by all men and that women would not fit into the company's "man camp" mentality. The women also claim they were turned down because they were too attractive. If they were hired, they were purportedly told they would be a distraction to the men, who would be unable to get their work done.

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#348

Post by logandavis » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 6:51 AM UTC

wallace_f wrote: post #240

logandavis wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Don't you believe that equality of opportunity would lead to equality of outcome (plus or minus random variation)? If not, what alternative result would you predict would arise from equality of opportunity, and why? 2) Don't you see how taking steps to correct towards equality of outcome leads towards equality of opportunity (by increasing the networking / financial / inspiration opportunities for disadvantaged gr…

1) Equality of opportunity will never lead to equality of outcome. Our current politics around equality are fraudulent. Different people have different attributes. It doesn't mean one group is better. It just means people are different. For example, the NBA will never be dominated by players of Asian descent. Another: you will never see women asking for equal opportunity for jobs like working in the north sea on offs…

1) You've carefully chosen two examples of jobs that depend highly on physical attributes with well-understood genetic causes (height, muscular development), and you've extrapolated this out to technical employees at Oracle, whose skills are hardly defined by such well-understood genetic markers. This is faulty logic.

2) Just so we're clear, you literally just compared affirmative action to Nazi Germany and the Spanish Inquisition. I would call this "false equivalence", but I suppose it's useless to try to "use words until the end of time" (unless, apparently, those words are "moral principle").

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#349

Post by dqv » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 6:58 AM UTC

Serious question:

If it's against the law to have a disproportionate amount of a certain group employed (or paid a certain way), but it's also against the law to discriminate in the hiring process (and in the termination process), how is a company like this supposed to comply?

* Hire more of x group - it's illegal because you'd be discriminating against a group to meet the employment quota

* Fire x group to equalize the amount of people working - it's illegal because you're targeting a specific group of people to fire

There doesn't seem to be any way to meet these requirements without some form of discrimination at some step of the way.

Does the government have "legalized discrimination" policies to allow companies to become compliant?

Re: U.S. sues Oracle, alleges salary and hiring discrimination

#350

Post by nommm-nommm » Thu, Jan 19, 2017, 7:02 AM UTC

wallace_f wrote: post #240

logandavis wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Don't you believe that equality of opportunity would lead to equality of outcome (plus or minus random variation)? If not, what alternative result would you predict would arise from equality of opportunity, and why? 2) Don't you see how taking steps to correct towards equality of outcome leads towards equality of opportunity (by increasing the networking / financial / inspiration opportunities for disadvantaged gr…

1) Equality of opportunity will never lead to equality of outcome. Our current politics around equality are fraudulent. Different people have different attributes. It doesn't mean one group is better. It just means people are different. For example, the NBA will never be dominated by players of Asian descent. Another: you will never see women asking for equal opportunity for jobs like working in the north sea on offs…

I like how you are so sure that not even a single woman could possibly ever want to work on an oil rig that you bring it up in two comments without first attempting to Google it. Hint, they do want to work on oil rigs, they do work on oil rigs, and they have used legal action against those who wouldn't let them work on oil rigs because of their gender.

That made up example is especially bizarre because I can't think of a reason why women, as a group, wouldn't want to work on an oil rig, other than concern about possible sexual harassment.

Women want, and have fought (and won) to have equal opportunity in even combat positions.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2014/04/24/do-military-women-want-...

Your worldview does not match the facts.