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

Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 38 posts

Re: Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

#21

Post by RivasPT »

jasonpeacock wrote: post #17
GenerocUsername wrote: post #2

Good. I've never seen a non-emotional argument for diversity and inclusovity programs. A company has no need to represent society as a whole, or worse, a duty to equalize societies inequalities. Any attempt to do so inherently harms as many people as it helps, it just moved the harm to groups unprotected by emotional arguments

When a company only hires white, able-bodied males aged 25-35 (for example) from a larger population that is diverse across sex, race, ability, and age, but those attributes have no correlation with job performance, then yes, there are problems - they're called sexism, racism, ableism, and ageism. And companies in the US do have a duty, per anti-discrimination laws.

Do you apply the same though for the NBA?

Re: Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

#22

Post by happytoexplain »

RivasPT wrote: post #21
jasonpeacock wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a company only hires white, able-bodied males aged 25-35 (for example) from a larger population that is diverse across sex, race, ability, and age, but those attributes have no correlation with job performance, then yes, there are problems - they're called sexism, racism, ableism, and ageism. And companies in the US do have a duty, per anti-discrimination laws.

Do you apply the same though for the NBA?

Even if, by asking this, you expose what you believe is hypocrisy on the part of the parent post, you'd still need to have an entire conversation to establish that the hiring practices of all companies should be the same as the hiring practices of the NBA. It would be much quicker to express your concerns directly, instead of simply pointing at other, barely related analogies.

Re: Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

#23

Post by happytoexplain »

mimikatz wrote: post #20
bobbytherobot wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are studies that found that companies earn more when their boards and management are 50/50 men and women. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-08/more-women-means-more... https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/02/why-companies-with-female-ma...

This is backwards thinking. Companies who have 50/50 male/female management are likely smarter companies, picking up smart women who are looked over for other roles and because they are smart enough to do that they likely do other smart things. It is the effect of a well run company not the cause of it. If your company is working working the other way they are dumb.

I completely agree that you can't better a body of people by forcing it to modify its constituents into a defined range of racial/gender ratios (and it may even be the case that you will worsen it on average). However, there is another goal: To help the individuals who would not have been hired. Of course, there's an argument to be made that any harm you might do to the body would then ultimately harm the individuals you helped to be placed in it, but I tend to believe that these opposing forces balance out on the net good side for the individuals.

Re: Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

#24

Post by derrick_jensen »

bobbytherobot wrote: post #9
GenerocUsername wrote: post #2

Good. I've never seen a non-emotional argument for diversity and inclusovity programs. A company has no need to represent society as a whole, or worse, a duty to equalize societies inequalities. Any attempt to do so inherently harms as many people as it helps, it just moved the harm to groups unprotected by emotional arguments

There are studies that found that companies earn more when their boards and management are 50/50 men and women. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-08/more-women-means-more... https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/02/why-companies-with-female-ma...

This might be a bias due to the fact that most companies are started by men (probably more inclined to take larger risks), and that companies need to reach a relatively successful state before the initial members of board and management have been circulated.

Re: Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

#25

Post by remarkEon »

trianglem wrote: post #13
xiphias2 wrote: post #5

I had to take that program in Switzerland, designed in the USA, which was telling me how I can date my coworkers even outside the company. It may be OK in the US, but what it was asking from me was unconstitutional in Switzerland. Of course I didn't say anyting, as I liked the job. A coworker of mine just clicked through the training without reading any of it. Also diversity became the main topic (without being on th…

Why would talking about diversity in a cross team meeting cause you to dislike attending them?

I would assume for the same reason that threads involving this topic on this website often devolve into flame wars.

Re: Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

#26

Post by [deleted] »

happytoexplain wrote: post #15
xiphias2 wrote: post #5

I had to take that program in Switzerland, designed in the USA, which was telling me how I can date my coworkers even outside the company. It may be OK in the US, but what it was asking from me was unconstitutional in Switzerland. Of course I didn't say anyting, as I liked the job. A coworker of mine just clicked through the training without reading any of it. Also diversity became the main topic (without being on th…

>Also diversity became the main topic (without being on the official agenda) of big cross-team meetings, so I learned not to go there Did you omit something here? Surely if you feel a topic is taking more time at meetings than you think it deserves, the answer is not to stop attending cross-team meetings .

[deleted]

Re: Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

#27

Post by fzeroracer »

GenerocUsername wrote: post #2

Good. I've never seen a non-emotional argument for diversity and inclusovity programs. A company has no need to represent society as a whole, or worse, a duty to equalize societies inequalities. Any attempt to do so inherently harms as many people as it helps, it just moved the harm to groups unprotected by emotional arguments

So quick question: Does your same argument also apply to ageism? Should it be OK for companies to discriminate based on a candidate's age and only hire say, people below the age of 40?

Or what about candidates that might have to use a wheelchair to get around?

Re: Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

#28

Post by belltaco »

RivasPT wrote: post #21
jasonpeacock wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a company only hires white, able-bodied males aged 25-35 (for example) from a larger population that is diverse across sex, race, ability, and age, but those attributes have no correlation with job performance, then yes, there are problems - they're called sexism, racism, ableism, and ageism. And companies in the US do have a duty, per anti-discrimination laws.

Do you apply the same though for the NBA?

Maybe read the comment again?

>but those attributes have no correlation with job performance

Re: Allegations: Google drastically rolled back diversity and inclusion programs

#30

Post by lostmsu »

xiphias2 wrote: post #5

I had to take that program in Switzerland, designed in the USA, which was telling me how I can date my coworkers even outside the company. It may be OK in the US, but what it was asking from me was unconstitutional in Switzerland. Of course I didn't say anyting, as I liked the job. A coworker of mine just clicked through the training without reading any of it. Also diversity became the main topic (without being on th…

What exactly was unconstitutional?
Post reply on HN