11–20 of 111 posts
Once a business starts making decisions based on anything arbitrary (e.g. nepotism, or meeting specific quotas that aren't related to the business), it's a slow downhill slide in my experience.
Practically: There's not much you can do other than quietly exit.
It’s so great that HN seems uniformly against racism affecting white men. But I guess I missed all the posts decrying discrimination when it was affecting women and POC?
If not, do you own the company or have significant leverage with the owners?
If the answers are "no" and "no", then the answer to your question doesn't matter, and any discussion is at-best therapeutic kvetching.
In the USA, in software, laborers have very little recourse other than finding a new job. We are explicitly carved out of what little labor protections are afforded to most other professions. This means that, from the perspective of tech employees, companies operate as feudal kingdoms and your only savior is a favorable labor market.
Practically, this translates into the following advice for questions on any number of HR-related topics: if there isn't a more powerful king who can step in for you, and you're not willing to challenge the king or find a new one, then go back to the fields and quietly work your plot of land.
I find myself giving this advice more and more often. Software people have been been empowered by excellent supply/demand dynamics for a couple decades and seem to have forgotten how capitalism sans labor power works.
It's been my experience as well. I mentioned before on different threads that as a hiring manager I've been told by HR to move all non white male candidates to the phone screen step automatically. Regardless of their resume. It does not make me comfortable at all, and I'll admit, it actually creates a bias in my mind when I do perform the phone screen for these candidates. It's completely counter productive because e…
It’s so great that HN seems uniformly against racism affecting white men. But I guess I missed all the posts decrying discrimination when it was affecting women and POC?
It’s so great that HN seems uniformly against racism affecting white men. But I guess I missed all the posts decrying discrimination when it was affecting women and POC?
Yes, you did. Those posts make the front page very frequently.
In India the concept is literally called "positive discrimination".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Votebank
» Votebank (also spelled vote-bank or vote bank), in the political discourse of India, is a term referring to a loyal bloc of voters from a single community, who consistently back a certain candidate or political formation in democratic elections. Such behavior is often the result of an expectation of benefits, whether real or imagined, from the political formations, often at the cost of other communities. Votebank politics is the practice of creating and maintaining votebanks through divisive policies. As it encourages voting on the basis of self-interest of certain groups, often against their better judgement, it is considered harmful to the principles of representative democracy.[by whom?]
1. From any given candidate’s perspective, I want them to be treated equally and evaluated fairly.
2. From a candidate pool perspective, I think we need to ensure that the candidate pool is opened more widely than to the top N schools or top M companies.