11–20 of 136 posts
I can't wait to see Googles response. I have no idea why they would even open themselves up to this criticism when they could easily align the salaries.
I can't wait to see Googles response. I have no idea why they would even open themselves up to this criticism when they could easily align the salaries.
Without data to back up either position debate is pretty much meaningless.
- field of work. Is this the whole company or just devs?
- years at the company.
- age, as a crude proxy for total experience at all companies.
Also does it say the magnitude of the gap?
There's a number of ways this headline could be true, all may be unfortunate from a societal perspective, but it only shows bias on Google's part if this is after controlling for the things companies say they base their pay on.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/07/google-pa...
Seems like it is early days on this lawsuit. The DoL are asking for more documentation about employee's pay and Google is calling it a "fishing expedition." This is definitely one to watch, but I won't be drawing any conclusions this early in this lawsuit (since even the DoL say they need more documentation to prove their case).
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/07/google-pa...
Of course, when I say "just as much" I mean "not much", because neither party has released anything substantive to rebut the other's claims. Until then, the court of public opinion is going to be both passionate and completely uninformed. But if I'm being cynical, that's probably the point of reporting on it at this stage.
Until the government releases their methodology it is hard to know how factual this assessment is. Google has done a lot of work internally to even up the gap and claims that they have achieved parity. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/07/google-pa... Either party could squelch the un-informed debate by releasing the data and the methods used to arrive at their conclusions.
Just like the overall gender pay gap in the US, right?
I can't read the whole article, but does it (or DOL documents) include details like amount of experience and job function? I've heard that much (not all) of the aggregate gap (i.e., on the national level) goes away after controlling for those variables. Curious if that applies here, and if so, to what degree. Edit: consider recent headlines promoting outrage at Marissa Mayer's successor earning double her salary beca…
The DoL hasn't released any data to back up their claim. Up to what is published for the moment, it's a blanket, overly broad, unsustained accusation by the DoL which makes the IT market look bad.
I'm appalled that no journalist (whether the WSJ or the others who relayed the info) do their work of putting the claims in perspective, and instead, just quote the nationwide non-normalized averages.