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

Infosys asked HR not to hire 'Indian-origin candidates', 'women with children'

timesnownews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 414 posts

Re: Infosys asked HR not to hire 'Indian-origin candidates', 'women with children'

#351

Post by giantg2 »

tatpacc wrote: post #312
giantg2 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My company quickly realized that outsourcing to an offshore Indian company was a mistake. We tried giving them new projects, but it was useless. We still use them, but only for very simple support work. My project was outsourced to them for support. The transition of our mature project to them took about a year. They wanted to replace our 10-12 person team with about 19 of their people. They also needed some of the p…

> And as soon as someone got good, they left the team/company because they could get a better job anywhere else. they left the company because they could get a "better pay" anywhere else. For offshore outsourcing company, their only business model is: amount they receive per resource - A. salary per resource - B. fix cost at company level. i.e. office rent, office maintenance, etc. And Project manager's OKR are mostl…

Yeah, I don't blame the person for leaving. It's either the company increasing margin too much, or more likely the executives in this country not understanding the full implications of this model on tech projects. It might work for call centers where you read off a script, but building software is different.

Re: Infosys asked HR not to hire 'Indian-origin candidates', 'women with children'

#352

Post by bongoman37 »

nonamechicken wrote: post #174
mkl95 wrote: post #53

I was a consultant for an American company that also hired dozens of cheap consultants from development countries. Mostly India but also neighbouring countries and some Eastern European countries. Indians were by far the hardest to work with. They ghosted women systematically which was a nightmare for our project manager. They also lied shamelessly about their qualifications which led to absurd situations. The proble…

> They ghosted women systematically which was a nightmare for our project manager. What do you mean by this? That they refuse to work with women based on their gender? "India has more women STEM grads than US, UK or France". And I see way way more women employees in software companies in India compared to US. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/india-has-more-wom...

No post body was provided.

Re: Infosys asked HR not to hire 'Indian-origin candidates', 'women with children'

#353

Post by P5fRxh5kUvp2th »

NoraCodes wrote: post #290
NeverFade wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In clearer words: I think you made this situation up > At no point did I say that wasn't happening. So it is happening, yet "I made it up"? It is both real and made up, at the same time?

You made up the relationship between economic status and race in this particular situation in order to strike an emotional chord. No?

They pointed out blacks can have money and non-blacks can be poor.

Re: Infosys asked HR not to hire 'Indian-origin candidates', 'women with children'

#356

Post by azangru »

vhgyu75e6u wrote: post #313
azangru wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many of them just can't speak English correctly. Only a small percentage of the individuals who speak English at a proficient level of those who do, they predominately come from very wealthy upper caste families and now you have a new problem. There is something very confusing to me in this paragraph. You put forth as a premise (at least if I am understanding the logic of the paragraph correctly) that fluency in En…

Maybe you should dust off your reading compression skills, his paragraph is pretty self explanatory. He is saying that those who speak English usually come from wealthy families and those whealty families have been raised to treat people from lower caste poorly.

> Maybe you should dust off your reading compression skills, his paragraph is pretty self explanatory

Thank you for your suggestion :-) Can you show where this specific point: "...and those whealty families have been raised to treat people from lower caste poorly" is made in his (we are assuming it's a he, aren't we? how bad of us) comment?

Re: Infosys asked HR not to hire 'Indian-origin candidates', 'women with children'

#357

Post by germandiago »

lvass wrote: post #197
germandiago wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can discrimnate against anyone and you do it every day. When you choose your gf you discriminated another girl that liked you. When you choose another coffee brand also. When you hire someone also. Ppl who pay the cost should be able to choose. Any solution forcing the party paying to choose what you would like them to choose without you paying the cost is, IMHO , plain wrong.

Discrimination at least in this case means attributing value to a person (seemingly) belonging to a certain group. The word you're describing is called choice.

When you choose something or someone you are assessing a value to it... that is the whole point.

You do not date X bc you prefer Y (higher value). You do it with everything... we do it. It is just how things are... that you choose one over the other makes the other the not chosen side of the thing. So yes, in some way you can see that as discrimination (even if we do not give it political meaning, it is still)

Re: Infosys asked HR not to hire 'Indian-origin candidates', 'women with children'

#358

Post by newsclues »

padolsey wrote: post #25
newsclues wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both are discriminatory, but one is virtuous and the other is bad?

Yes. Not to mince words, as others frequently do, but that's basically what's happening. The alterntive, so-called "pure meritocracy", is a farce because the implied implicit "merit" is, by the very nature of the systemic inequalities that exist, unequally distributed. And merit is transferred down the generations. Privilege begets privilege. Etc. This is the issue that we are rightfully trying to counter. It is righ…

Are you going to complain when other people seize power and run the same game against your side, or will you say well played?

Rather than fight to make the system equal and fair, you favour tilting it in your direction assuming it will never tilt the other way?

Re: Infosys asked HR not to hire 'Indian-origin candidates', 'women with children'

#359

Post by jwond »

sumeno wrote: post #344
jwond wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Treating people differently on the basis of race or sex is discrimination. Equity is explicitly about trying to force equality of outcome between different groups by discriminating against groups that have been deemed privileged and in favor of groups that have been deemed oppressed.

If I help an elderly person across the street am I discriminating against the young? Are VA hospitals discriminating against non-veterans? If my neighbor's house is on fire is the fire department discriminating against me when they don't spray my house with water? We make accomodations for people in society all the time, it doesn't mean we are discriminating against people who aren't part of that group. Hiring practi…

> Making accomodations for other people to reduce that disparity is not discrimination.

Giving people different accommodations based on race or sex is discrimination no matter how many times you claim it is not.

> Hiring practices in our industry have historically, and still do, overwhelmingly benefit white men. […] You STILL have the overwhelming advantage in the hiring process and are crying discrimination. It's absurd

“Equity” as it is currently practiced is inherently unfair because it reduces everything down to race, sex, and other group identities and assumes that all white men are privileged while all women and non-white people are oppressed.

Under the current equity framework a black person who was born into a wealthy family with loving parents, attended expensive private schools, and never wanted for anything is “oppressed” and deserves to be given special accommodations, while a white person born into extreme poverty with drug-addicted, absent parents is assumed to be a privileged oppressor. That is absurd.

Re: Infosys asked HR not to hire 'Indian-origin candidates', 'women with children'

#360

Post by germandiago »

em-bee wrote: post #238
germandiago wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the glass ceiling? In Norway years back they promoted a program for women to study engineering disciplines. They increased a lot. So at some point they thought they could stop doing it and percentages came back to where they were before after some time I recall. If it was a cultural thing... they would have stayed. On the way u had discrimination by sex (AFAIK men were not paid for choosing engineering and wo…

i know nothing about what happened there in norway, so what i say is pure speculation. if i understand you correctly part of the program was financial support. so once that support went away, the numbers went back. sounds to me that, all other things being equal, the program was not able to change the culture. and that includes possible ongoing discrimination against women, only that the financial support helped some…

> if i understand you correctly part of the program was financial support. so once that support went away, the numbers went back.

Yes, that is what happened.

> sounds to me that, all other things being equal, the program was not able to change the culture

This reminds me of "we did not try hard enough, we need more intervention". I am not a proponent of it. The culture was not changed probably because there is more than just culture underlying human choice... at least that is my belief. Of course, not all is biology, but not all is culture. It seems that in this case things tend to indicate that there is more than culture behind these choices.

> it is possible that this program was the wrong approach

why not just convince people why they should choose X or Y? Why you have to reserve money or resources actively? That, you know, means that some people that are more valuable than others, will lose their chance... is not that discrimination? Is it not that what they are fighting? You do not fight discrimination by promoting it from another side...

> i may love programming, but i hate working in a bro-culture

Oh, and in teaching it does not happen the opposite? I might not like in a sis culture, right? I mean, the problem exists... no, the problem does not. Things are the way they are and we can encourage people to change them if they want, not by shifting the cost to others. If you work somewhere, you cannot pretend the world will change immediately around you just bc we think it should be something different. We need to deal with that, and trying to force everything into our ideal just leads to frustration. Instead we should analyze real causes for things and why they happen or will keep happening instead of fighting them by transferring costs to people that have nothing to do with the problem.

Post reply on HN