Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#31

Post by one2know » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:35 AM UTC

marcinzm wrote: post #6

umvi wrote: post #2

> "We are clear that the law prohibits us from discriminating on the basis of race," the firm's lawyer Dev Stahlkopf blogged. Pardon my ignorance... But I thought in the case of affirmative action, discrimination based on race was legal? Reading on... > It has informed the tech giant that while companies can set affirmative action goals to boost employment of "minorities and women", they "must not engage in discrimin…

>How can you achieve affirmative action if you can't discriminate on the basis of race? Interview training to minimize implicit bias in the interview process. Interview training to minimize acts that make certain groups uncomfortable. Removing employees from the interview pool who show a racial bias. Resume review that omits names and other racial indicators. Etc.

Interview training does nothing. The people who are pushing affirmative action are doing it on purpose because of their political ideology. These people think that if they have more women, LGBTQ, and minorities in the company, those people will support them politically and they will have more power. There is no way you can train away that. Second, you can't remove employees when their bias is in support of the managers and the company board members. Managers are selectively choosing interviewers because of their racial bias. At a previous job managers would have new hire LGBTQ or minority junior employees conduct interviews instead of senior employees who had been at the company for years. Activist board members set CEO bonus goals that scale with race and gender quotas as well. Resume doesn't matter because they recruit through special minority, women, or LGBTQ invite only recruiting events where SWM's are not even allowed in.

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#32

Post by andrewstuart2 » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:35 AM UTC

thatfrenchguy wrote: post #25

xvector wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Affirmative action needs to die. As an Asian, I hate that I have to work harder just to get the same opportunities. Affirmative action is simply racism against minorities that “don’t matter” to the public narrative in favor of minorities that “do matter.” Imagine telling an Asian child that they have to work way harder because of their race. While their friends get to go out and play, they have to sit down and study…

Fascinating how this discourse is always done by upper-middle-class people, who already have all the opportunities in the world in the United States.

"When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#33

Post by ausbah » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:35 AM UTC

elisbce wrote: post #18

Any affirmative action is by definition discriminating on the basis of race. If you want the best candidate for the job, you don't look at race, you look at their abilities to do the job. Period. Any bias towards hiring one race implies bias against hiring from other races. Why is it okay to have almost no Asian players in the NBA while a small percentage of black people in tech is a big fuss? It is all hypocrisy.

how about racial biases in hiring? no hiring is completely meritocratic, even in tech

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#34

Post by whoisjuan » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:35 AM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #22

whoisjuan wrote: post #16

Not commenting about the merits of this specific probe, but here is a thought. African Americans are 13% of the US Population. Isn't it reasonable to aspire to have at least 13% of African American staff (proportionally adjusted per state/city populations)? This is a rhetoric question, what causes that to not be the case. The article doesn't mention the numbers but when a particular race is disproportionately less re…

It depends what you're measuring the proportion against, and depends to such a huge degree that I really feel like we've gotta disregard the idea of detecting discrimination this way. For example, African Americans are only 4% of the population in Microsoft's home state.

That's fair. I think my point is that a statistical representation allows you to see if one race is being favored over another one. But of course it's not a straight forward analysis as you correctly pointed with the WA black population example.

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#35

Post by zaroth » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:36 AM UTC

elisbce wrote: post #18

Any affirmative action is by definition discriminating on the basis of race. If you want the best candidate for the job, you don't look at race, you look at their abilities to do the job. Period. Any bias towards hiring one race implies bias against hiring from other races. Why is it okay to have almost no Asian players in the NBA while a small percentage of black people in tech is a big fuss? It is all hypocrisy.

There’s no getting around the fact. To the point where California is currently debating whether to remove the following phrase from their State Constitution;

The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#36

Post by option » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:36 AM UTC

Discrimination is discrimination no matter how you package it. It has been tried everywhere since probably first humans in a manner which “fit” opinions prevalent during particular times.

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#37

Post by doggosphere » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:37 AM UTC

sJ646U9k6c6gME9 wrote: post #27

xvector wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Affirmative action needs to die. As an Asian, I hate that I have to work harder just to get the same opportunities. Affirmative action is simply racism against minorities that “don’t matter” to the public narrative in favor of minorities that “do matter.” Imagine telling an Asian child that they have to work way harder because of their race. While their friends get to go out and play, they have to sit down and study…

Come to the South: affirmative action isn’t a thing here. It’s a breath of fresh air. You’ll find that there are other freedoms that have been taken away from you in the north. All of them are alive and well here.

Ah yes the South, where affirmative action isn't a thing, but racial divide is.

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#38

Post by nickpeterson » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:37 AM UTC

elisbce wrote: post #18

Any affirmative action is by definition discriminating on the basis of race. If you want the best candidate for the job, you don't look at race, you look at their abilities to do the job. Period. Any bias towards hiring one race implies bias against hiring from other races. Why is it okay to have almost no Asian players in the NBA while a small percentage of black people in tech is a big fuss? It is all hypocrisy.

Let’s use that NBA example, is the lack of Asian NBA players a problem? If it is, how would you go about fixing it?

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#39

Post by run2arun » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:38 AM UTC

whoisjuan wrote: post #16

Not commenting about the merits of this specific probe, but here is a thought. African Americans are 13% of the US Population. Isn't it reasonable to aspire to have at least 13% of African American staff (proportionally adjusted per state/city populations)? This is a rhetoric question, what causes that to not be the case. The article doesn't mention the numbers but when a particular race is disproportionately less re…

It's not reasonable to use the general population as the reference. Should NBA players' races reflect the general population's? There are better references like the number of African Americans graduating with computer science degrees. And if that number is low, that's the one to boost.

Re: Microsoft probed by US government over aim to double black staff numbers

#40

Post by throwawaysea » Thu, Oct 08, 2020, 2:42 AM UTC

meroes wrote: post #23

elisbce wrote: post #18

Any affirmative action is by definition discriminating on the basis of race. If you want the best candidate for the job, you don't look at race, you look at their abilities to do the job. Period. Any bias towards hiring one race implies bias against hiring from other races. Why is it okay to have almost no Asian players in the NBA while a small percentage of black people in tech is a big fuss? It is all hypocrisy.

And is that mutually exclusive to creating more opportunities for minorities to apply? And what if the current practices sans AA are already discriminatory (e.g. try having certain natural hairstyles at your interview that don't fit the status quo)...

Setting quotas/goals doesn’t seem like the right approach though. We can try to correct for the biases you name without setting numerical targets. The thing is, there isn’t any correct number to aim for. For instance, some cultures emphasize STEM education/careers and it isn’t surprising or incorrect to see them represented in tech at numbers higher than their makeup of the general population. Setting targets like proportional demographic representation for blacks or any other racial group ultimately amounts to racist discrimination against those other races.