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

Google staff walk out over women's treatment

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 471 posts

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#111

Post by victoriasun »

qubax wrote: post #78
ChrisRR wrote: post #10

So the first demand is "A commitment to end pay and opportunity inequality" I'd like to see the actual data behind this constant inequality claim. I would be genuinely interested to see what kind of difference there is between the sexes when comparing like-for-like jobs. I've heard speculation that women don't argue for higher salaries as much as men, I've also heard that the data is never accurate because it doesn't…

> I would be genuinely interested to see what kind of difference there is between the sexes when comparing like-for-like jobs. There really aren't any differences. Just do a simple mental exercise. Imagine if the gender gap is real. Male programmers demand $100K while female programmers demand $77K for the same exact quality of work. What would this mean? It would mean all tech companies would only hire females. For…

Sigh.. I've seen this argument so many times I have to wonder if the people peddling it has ever sat on a hiring panel.

The decision to hire someone in a high-skilled job has extraordinarily little to do with their compensation and much more to do with their perceived value. Society has conditioned us to view a certain kind of masculinity as inherent value. Men are rewarded for their aggression and confidence, whereas women are criticized for ego and emotionality.

Perhaps this argument has credence in the low-skilled labor market, but it is not applicable to tech, where compensation packages are routinely so large and supported by large VC funds that those of us who do hire can see those salary differences as negligible. And, even if I were sensitive to those differences, I would not hesitate to pay 30-50k in order to get the right person for the role.

The question here is: are we doing a good job of finding the right person for the role? That is why the Google women are demanding "opportunity equity." Because the system I just described above is prone to failure thanks to unconscious bias.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#112

Post by ryanmercer »

shrewduser wrote: post #99
typon wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you realize that all the things that make your current job bearable like 8 hour workday, weekends and safe work environment are only possible because people in the past had the spine to strike and demand better conditions for themselves and their fellow workers?

People repeat this line ad nauseum but i find it hard to believe work conditions would not improve over time if not for the presence of unions, look at highly unionised countries vs less unionised countries and compare the quality of life / workplace for an example. while i'm sure unions were involved i doubt they were the only reason we started reducing work hours and improving work conditions, here's a good history…

>while i'm sure unions were involved i doubt they were the only reason we started reducing work hours and improving work conditions,

You are absolutely correct, I can give a VERY modern example. Medical residents now have capped hours, in I believe all 50 states, due to New York passing the Libby Zion Law and other states adopting similar laws. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libby_Zion_Law

The same goes for pilots - https://work.chron.com/duty-limitations-faa-pilot-17646.html

Truck drivers - https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hours-service/summary-...

Etc.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#113

Post by ChrisRR »

qubax wrote: post #78
ChrisRR wrote: post #10

So the first demand is "A commitment to end pay and opportunity inequality" I'd like to see the actual data behind this constant inequality claim. I would be genuinely interested to see what kind of difference there is between the sexes when comparing like-for-like jobs. I've heard speculation that women don't argue for higher salaries as much as men, I've also heard that the data is never accurate because it doesn't…

> I would be genuinely interested to see what kind of difference there is between the sexes when comparing like-for-like jobs. There really aren't any differences. Just do a simple mental exercise. Imagine if the gender gap is real. Male programmers demand $100K while female programmers demand $77K for the same exact quality of work. What would this mean? It would mean all tech companies would only hire females. For…

Why make assumptions? I'm an engineer and I make decisions based on data and information presented to me, and try to avoid guess work and assumptions as much as possible.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#114

Post by ryanmercer »

CydeWeys wrote: post #104
ryanmercer wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never worked for a unionized company yet hey, I've been treated fairly.

You've only been treated fairly because of the substantial gains that unions have won for you in the past. You don't even realize how much worse it could be. Enjoying that 5-day 40-hour workweek? Without unions, it'd be a lot worse.

>You've only been treated fairly because of the substantial gains that unions have won for you in the past.

I'm treated fairly because it's the 21st century not 19th and early 20th century, when unions did most of their beneficial work. We have things like OSHA, fire marshals, etc. We have far more avenues of employment than in the 19th and early 20th centuries as well. And arguably more importantly, we have mobile broadcast platforms called cellphones that with a few taps of a screen can broadcast to a global audience to document conditions and immediately expose them.

Unions are dying, presumably because people don't want to be a part of them (can you blame them, there's countless documented instances of union corruption, in some instances with direct ties to organized crime ahem -> https://lrionline.com/mafiaunion-ties-still-strong/ )

In 2016, there were 14.6 million members in the U.S., down from 17.7 million in 1983. The percentage of workers belonging to a union in the United States was 10.7%, compared to 20.1% in 1983.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#115

Post by zimpenfish »

brobdingnagians wrote: post #18
ChrisRR wrote: post #10

So the first demand is "A commitment to end pay and opportunity inequality" I'd like to see the actual data behind this constant inequality claim. I would be genuinely interested to see what kind of difference there is between the sexes when comparing like-for-like jobs. I've heard speculation that women don't argue for higher salaries as much as men, I've also heard that the data is never accurate because it doesn't…

Time magazine, which doesn't exactly seem to be a bastion of conservatism, had an article about this http://time.com/3222543/wage-pay-gap-myth-feminism/ , which had more hard-facts than anyone else I've seen, but the conclusion was that most of the claims made by the wage gap supporters are cherrypicked and false. Although, if Google specifically has a problem with it, I'd definitely be willing to listen. If they are…

> Time magazine, which doesn't exactly seem to be a bastion of conservatism

Although Christina Hoff Sommers does have a noticeable bias/axe to grind since she's pretty anti-feminism and considers there to be a "war against boys". Also she works for the AEI which is a conservative think tank.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#116

Post by 0xfeeddeadbeef »

YorkshireSeason wrote: post #47
cimmanom wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you believe that, why shouldn’t there be a process to investigate the claims? You think all harassment claims should be automatically dismissed as false instead?

all harassment claims should be No, of course not. Symmetrically, the should also not automatically accepted as true. There should be an objective, measurable process. Given the cul-de-sac that organisations like Google have been strong-armed into, I think the obvious next step is (1) to record all work-time interaction of all employees and store them for a long time, e.g. at least 10 years. (2) Give a absolutely cle…

> store them for a long time, e.g. at least 10 years.

Not sufficient. Should store them for at least 36 years.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#117

Post by 3jckd »

gambiting wrote: post #91
3jckd wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

__If__ it's really a problem, the only way to actually fix this would be to remove any kind of negotation, because two people with identical CVs might settle on vastly different salaries and it's highly unlikely that the employer is going to overcompensate them. However, I've heard people argue that a right to ask for a lower pay is also an advantage in labour market because it's yet another axis of competitiveness.

How would you remove any kind of negotiation though? Say that it's illegal for an applicant to say "You have to pay me X or I won't accept the offer"? Or for an employee to say "Give me a raise of Y, or I'm leaving"? What if they already have an offer from a different company for more money? Can they tell their current employer? And if they do, can the employer offer to increase their wage to keep them? And if they c…

I don't think it's really feasible, for the reasons you mentioned, among others. Nevertheless, there are countries which try to govern (or at least suggest) the min-max salaries that you can expect given your profession/experience/skill, e.g. Germany.

Like many people replying to the OP, I'd like to see some data that looks at it from different perspectives, tho, instead of just picking a side and arguing for it - "there's a wage-gap" vs "look, there actually isn't".

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#118

Post by slivym »

anon1252 wrote: post #28
slivym wrote: post #5

All of their demands seem pretty reasonable. It looks like the big gripe is that basically there's no real process in place for situations of misconduct in the office. To draw an analogy, this would be like Google not having a process to investigate and resolve site outages - it would be unthinkable, so why aren't they treating their organisation with the same rigor they treat their website.

> there's no real process in place for situations of misconduct in the office. There shouldn't be a "process" set by Google when it comes to sexual harassment, employees should be able to sue, that's the process,sexual harassment is a crime, they can't sue because Google force them into arbitration, which should be illegal for an employer to do that to an employee IMHO. this is a denial of justice.

I think you're being too rigid. There are situations where one employee forces themselves on another at the christmas party. In that situation obviously the right call is to report it to the police and to have a disciplinary process internally for gross misconduct. But there's a million smaller examples of harassment that just need to be tackled by the organization. For example, if a man repeatedly makes comments about a woman's appearance, there needs to be a process where the woman can report that, be heard and have the issue addressed - it may be as simple as the employee's boss pulling the into a room and saying "stop being a creep". Not everything is solved by law suits.

However, obviously if things do escalate, access to the law should be guaranteed and the binding arbitration should clearly be dropped.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#119

Post by 0xfeeddeadbeef »

qubax wrote: post #94
cimmanom wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parent was edited from “Let's see evidence of misconduct before rushing to judgment.”

But why is it flagged? That is a reasonable comment. Also, what's with the rampant brigading here. Every reasonable comment here seems to get immediately and automatically downvoted.

Before posting opinions, one should verify them against "Hacker News Tired and Discredited Wrongthink Opinions Directory".

Edit: As it seems, the rule applies to this comment too. Dear reader, if you feel uncomfortable are offended by this comment, you are the problem.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#120

Post by zimpenfish »

ryanmercer wrote: post #114
CydeWeys wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've only been treated fairly because of the substantial gains that unions have won for you in the past. You don't even realize how much worse it could be. Enjoying that 5-day 40-hour workweek? Without unions, it'd be a lot worse.

>You've only been treated fairly because of the substantial gains that unions have won for you in the past. I'm treated fairly because it's the 21st century not 19th and early 20th century, when unions did most of their beneficial work. We have things like OSHA, fire marshals, etc. We have far more avenues of employment than in the 19th and early 20th centuries as well. And arguably more importantly, we have mobile b…

> Unions are dying, presumably because people don't want to be a part of them

Couldn't this also be down to rules against union busting being relaxed and companies like Amazon taking full advantage thus making it difficult for people to join a union even if they wanted to?

Post reply on HN