Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not about effort. It’s aboit discriminating against people to fill quotas and turning away qualified candidates when they’re not the “correct” gender or race.
It's wrong to claim that qualified candidates are being rejected in favor of less qualified, but diverse, candidates. No position in this argument supports anything like that.
Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
41–50 of 90 posts
Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
#42If Google continues to advertise a strong stance on diversity the problem may solve itself, for them. I say this because I’ve noticed that my clients with a strong LGBT pride message tend to further attract people from that community. Resulting in an amplification. In one such company this was very pronounced.
The reverse (people not from that community self selecting out) might also be true but I don’t have anything to back that up with.
Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's wrong to claim that qualified candidates are being rejected in favor of less qualified, but diverse, candidates. No position in this argument supports anything like that.
https://www.fastcompany.com/40538483/youtube-sued-for-limiti...
At no point in that article does it mention hiring unqualified candidates.
To be a bit blunter, there are plenty of great engineers out there, and some of them happen to not be white/Asian.
I don't know if what YouTube did was right or wrong, but pretending like only white/Asian people can be good at computers is quite insane.
Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
#44If we aren't going to mark this as dupe, I'll repeat my comment from the thread yesterday: Per the article, backed by "several hundred employees" out of a 2017 Alphabet headcount of 80,110.
Popularity is not a measure of validity.
Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
#45To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…
> That sharp of a gender gap is not the case in Eastern Europe.
Because gender equality is not in such a good shape in EE. The equal representation of women in STEM is inversely correlated with gender equality, it seems. Look at the data. In countries with generally high levels of freedom women don't choose STEM careers (look at Scandinavia), while in poorer and more backwards (in terms of g. equality) countries sometimes more women go to STEM careers than men. (That's partly because in rich and free countries women can choose not to earn STEM salaries and also STEM salaries are not that far from other professions', while in other countries women are often under pressure to go for STEM careers despite they don't fancy that at all.)
Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
#46If we aren't going to mark this as dupe, I'll repeat my comment from the thread yesterday: Per the article, backed by "several hundred employees" out of a 2017 Alphabet headcount of 80,110.
Popularity is not a measure of validity.
I'll also repeat sonnyblarney's comment:
What's also kind of buried [in the article] is that the 'employees' are a small fraction of Google's staff and do not represent the overall staff at company, as the headline kind of implies.
Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.fastcompany.com/40538483/youtube-sued-for-limiti...
At no point in that article does it mention hiring unqualified candidates. To be a bit blunter, there are plenty of great engineers out there, and some of them happen to not be white/Asian. I don't know if what YouTube did was right or wrong, but pretending like only white/Asian people can be good at computers is quite insane.
If you reject candidates based on race, the probability of that having happened is very high.
Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
#48For interest here's where you can find the relevant motions being referred to in the article: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1652044/000130817918...
The ones being referred to are:
Proposal Number 6 Stockholder Proposal Regarding a Report on Gender Pay
Proposal Number 9 Stockholder Proposal Regarding Board Diversity and Qualifications
Proposal Number 10 Stockholder Proposal Regarding a Report on Content Governance
I'm not that familiar with corporate motions so I might be misinterpreting what I'm reading but it looks like the motions are for Alphabet to produce a report about gender pay discrimination, to disclose the qualifications of the board (including ideological leanings and biographical data), and to produce a report on the efficacy of Alphabet's terms of service enforcement (in particular around user uploaded content).
Alphabet's disagreeing statements on the first one is largely of the form "we think gender pay is an important issue (see existing published reports) but we don't think this is motion is a good idea". The second one they actually support saying "sure, a diverse board is a good idea". For the third one their response is along the lines of "We take this seriously to the tune of hiring thousands of people to enforce our terms of service".
My biggest surprise after seeing the article and reading the materials myself was that the second proposal (board diversity) claims that Alphabet is known to "operate in ideological hegemony that eschews conservative people" which is not the impression I took away from the article.
Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
#49I like what we are doing at our company, an unofficial 1:5, where for every over represented candidate, we aggressively pursue five underrepresented candidates. It is a lot easier to train people for tech than it is to "train" someone to come from a oppressed community.
Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees
#50To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…
Interesting, so this sounds like we could start to apply principles of prospect theory and the system-level discovery utility of lawsuits. I've seen medical literature that argues malpractice lawsuits actually serve a valuable discovery function and may not actually add cost to the system since they make other parts of the system cheaper (preventing excess care due to underdiagnosis, for instance).
So, which sex generates more discrimination law-suits per capita? What is the payout on the average lawsuit? Does changing the sex mix decrease the lawsuits per capita from each sex? Is there a baseline "noise" of lawsuits?