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

Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 494 posts

Re: Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

#111

Post by lhorie »

knuththetruth wrote: post #89
lhorie wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that illegal?

I imagine that Google, famous for their participation in an illegal wage fixing cartel and with its literal army of high-paid attorneys, isn’t too afraid of the legal consequences of discriminating against one woman. Well, so long as the NYTimes doesn’t write about it at least.

Google isn't a person and high-paid attorneys aren't antibodies. It's much more likely that people doing the interviews don't have a clue how to do it (likely because their expertise is software engineering, not recruiting)

The sooner we stop blaming faceless corporations and start acknowledging that each person involved in recruiting (including you and me) needs to take training and ethics more seriously, the better.

Re: Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

#112

Post by krschultz »

sokoloff wrote: post #44
jonathankoren wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? It’s paid leave. You get your whole salary, but you don’t come to work.

Yes, and where do you imagine the money comes from?

If you're going to make a financial argument (as opposed to the moral one), you should take a look at how we fund entitlements in this country. You want population growth. The financial disincentive for having kids is a real problem.

Re: Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

#113

Post by krschultz »

ukj wrote: post #23
coldtea wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, you know, businesses and societies could leave that as a courtesy to just those that did chose to have children -- a group of people that every society that cares about sustaining itself forward should encourage and respect.

Sure. Everybody likes grand gestures. Nobody likes paying for them. As a social responsibility it's not on private businesses to cover the cost. Pay for it through taxation. Until then - my choice is a competitive advantage.

I'm going to guess you will get more growth in your career by learning how to be empathetic than negotiating with such an asinine argument.

Re: Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

#115

Post by AchieveLife »

lsd5you wrote: post #34

Is this really surprising? We cannot have meritocracy and a system where some people will go missing for a year at a time (and perhaps come back with completely different motivations). There is a fundamental mismatch, and as much as some people want to frame careers as lifestyle and entitlement, the primary purpose is to get things done and produce value. The situation is even more stark for smaller companies, many o…

The system that you are proposing is anti-human. We are not machines and time does not directly equal productivity.

Diversity is a proven cultural milestone that increases the efficacy of organizations.

I'm curious what you would say to this. What about individuals who have mental or physical disorders and need a reduced work schedule?

Re: Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

#116

Post by [deleted] »

rocqua wrote: post #79
Alex3917 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the solutions to this is matching paternity leave. A better solution would just unpaid parental leave for both sexes, with a stipend paid for by the government. The idea of paying people some percentage of their salary while on parental leave is an incredibly regressive policy and should be banned.

How is it regressive that compensation during parental leave depends on salary? Without that, women higher in the career ladder are disincentivized from taking maternity leave. Moreover, you might even get women who earn more on leave than during the job, which is simply weird.

[deleted]

Re: Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

#117

Post by krschultz »

Alex3917 wrote: post #11
rednerrus wrote: post #2

One of the solutions to this is matching paternity leave. If I gave you the choice of two employees, one of whom would take 12 weeks of paid leave and one who would take 2 weeks of paid leave, which would you choose? If you offered both sexes 12 weeks of paid leave, you wouldn't have to make this decision.

> One of the solutions to this is matching paternity leave. A better solution would just unpaid parental leave for both sexes, with a stipend paid for by the government. The idea of paying people some percentage of their salary while on parental leave is an incredibly regressive policy and should be banned.

We currently let companies have wide leeway in what they negotiate for compensation with their employees (and contractors). But the problem that you think deserves to be banned is that some companies pay the people on parental leave?

Man do I have bad news for you, my company gives people bonuses when they have children.

Re: Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

#118

Post by kuriho »

AchieveLife wrote: post #91
kuriho wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that sounds like straight up fraud to me. Do companies in America get financial support from the government for employees on pregnancy leave?

Do companies you work at not hire employees for the long term?

They mainly hire people to replace others that quit/retired or to fill a new position created to support a team with a steadily growing workload. New hires are subject to a 3 month probation period during which both parties can end the contract at will. More than 80% of all positions are long term.

I would hope that someone looking for a long term employment at a company would be honest and upfront with something like a planned 1-year vacation. My only gripe with the parent poster is that they are hiding(rightfully so) this so close before their planned leave and thus do not appear serious about a long term employment at that company.

Re: Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

#119

Post by lhorie »

habosa wrote: post #55

This area is really tough. I feel terrible for women who experience this bias, but the solution is not nearly as obvious as with race/gender/age/religious/etc discrimination. In those cases the answer is: stop being biased. Let's say you're a small company and you can really only afford to have Even if they both plan to have 2 kids in the next 4 years, it's a biological reality that it will take the woman away from w…

If you can only afford 10 people, you can usually also get by with 9. Even a healthy male full-time employee is a much bigger commitment financially to a company than just the salary number (i.e. you need to pay payroll taxes, insurance, benefits, equipment, recruiter fees, etc)

If you're going to be stretched thin financially after hiring a single new person, you probably shouldn't be hiring.

Re: Pregnancy Discrimination Is Rampant Inside America’s Biggest Companies

#120

Post by kgwgk »

untog wrote: post #30
Geeek wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sociatel pressure usually comes after (and very much influenced) biological manifestations.

I ask again: what biological pressures would lead to a father spending less time with his children?

If you're actually interested in theories that have been discussed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_investment
Post reply on HN