Live data from Hacker News

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

timesnownews.com

361–370 of 414 posts

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

#361

This seems like a management fuck-up. It's kind of funny because indian outsourcing companies like Infosys, TCS, etc. have often been accused of hiring a disproportionately high percentage of South Asians and Indians within the United States. In fact, this same company named here (Infosys) has also been earlier accused of favouring asians and not hiring "stupid Americans" - https://arstechnica.com/information-technol…

In this particular case, Infy wanted to hire non-Indians for executive positions so that they can sign more deals.

I don't find this surprising - I remember that one case study often discussed in indian MBA courses showed that in a European country, indian-origin salespersons often performed worse than salespersons who are local citizens.

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

#362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

Not sure how your argument works. Because there are more women in STEM in India, Indians in the US can't ghost women?

"Indians ghost women" is an assertion made without proof. More women engineers is a provable fact.

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

#363
post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

"we did not try hard enough, we need more intervention". I am not a proponent of it.

then why try at all? if we believe this goal should be achived then we should keep trying until we get there.

You do not fight discrimination by promoting it from another side

that is a reasonable argument, but plenty of counter arguments exist. some are being discussed on this page.

Oh, and in teaching it does not happen the opposite?

oh sure, however, teaching is an entirely different problem.

as a parent i want my children to be exposed to male and female role models (what teachers are to them) in equal measure. therefore for the sake of children i want gender parity in schools to be enforced by law.

but you could make the same argument with other professions that are dominated by one gender. nurses are probably a good example where men may not feel comfortable.

we can encourage people to change them if they want, not by shifting the cost to others

why not?

one question is, what goal do we want to achieve. the other question is, how do we achieve it?

what we want is gender equality, that is equality of opportunity (not necessarily equality of outcome)

so that means we want more opportunities for women in engineering. for that we need to understand what is keeping women out of engineering, and how can we get more women into engineering. (and then replay that for any profession and respective gender)

and if access to financial resources is a reason, then it absolutely makes sense to provide additional financial resources to women.

again, i have no idea what happened in norway. access to university is free in norway, so i don't know what they would need money for.

if discrimination by men is what keeps women out of engineering, then what we need to do is to get men to change. how do we get them to change? possibly only by exposing men to more female coworkers. but that means forcing the issue, and pushing women into engineering until men learn to treat women as equals.

i don't care about gender balance in engineering or any other profession (except teaching), but i strongly care about women and men being treated equally, and a large part of that is men learning to treat women as their equal and respect them professionally.

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

you are saying that as if it were a contradiction. yes of course we need to analyze the real causes.

but we also need to find an approach to solve the problem.

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

#364
post #359
post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ab…

The vast vast majority of interviewers and hiring managers in our industry are going to be white men. They will consciously or unconsciously tend to favor people like them, other white men, regardless of other factors due to human nature. Efforts to account for that are not discriminating against the white men, the discrimination is already happening to the people who aren't white men, accounting for that existing systematic discrimination is not reverse discrimination.

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

#365
post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume they didn't answer questions or requests from women, or otherwise silently refused to directly work with them.

Sigh. I would have thought people who worked in Tech would be open minded ( and sometimes too open minded ). My next question would be if they are doing this to Indian woman or every woman?

What in tech makes you open minded? I work in tech and many of my friends work in tech too and we aren’t particularly open minded. Of course we don’t tell anybody about that…

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

#366
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…

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…

Racism is thick here.

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

#367
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t fix racism/sexism by being racist/sexist.

Do you have sources for this? Because from what I’ve read affirmative action has been huge in giving that initial boost for creation of more generational wealth. I mean affirmative action for white people is effectively why white people are so ahead in this country (red lining)

There is a logical argument that if you do A, and the problem is doing A, then doing more of A will not fix it. So no need to have sources.

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

#368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not how citations work. Can’t prove a negative. It’s on YOU to provide proof because you’re the one making the assertion that future racial discrimination fixes past injustice (which I wholeheartedly disagree with).

Make a powerful assertion against the tide of conversation then demand academic level sources without trying to convince anyone of your own position. There is a term for people like you and out rhymes with "scroll". No one is obliged to engage in your attempted argument nor to do more work than you're willing to put into the conversation.

I’m sincere. Engaging in racial discrimination does not fix racism. It perpetuates it.

It blows my mind that I have to state this in the current year. We have regressed so far.

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

#369
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…

> Indians were by far the hardest to work with. They ghosted women systematically which was a nightmare for our project manager. I recall that Amazon went through the trouble of paying for TV ads proudly stating that they now have in India delivery posts manned exclusively by women, and the ad is comprised of indian delivery women delivering packages to indian men who in turn are giving them all sorts of weird looks.…

No post body was provided.

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

#370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence at all that women or minorities are in "unhirability loops"? Something like 80% of the managers I've had in my career have been Indians, and the majority of them were women. Every company I've worked at has many Indian employees, and I strongly suspect the male/female ratio was at least at parity with the hiring pipeline. Moreover, if one woman was discriminated against, you can't make up for it…

Yes, for example even after decades of saying there should be more women and minority people on corporate boards, it's all still dominated by white men. California brought in a law banning all male boards in 2018 because the problem is so endemic. Not 1988, 2018. A majority of companies in the S&P 500 have at least one woman on their boards, but only about a quarter have more than two, according to a study from PwC.…

Personally, I'm pretty fatigued at people pointing to disparities as though the cause of the disparity is so obviously nefarious that they needn't even articulate it (as though it's some sort of self-evident truth). I think you'll have a better time persuading people (certainly me) if you make the case that the boardroom gender disparity is caused by discrimination (rather than, for example, differing priorities between men and women in aggregate) or perhaps why (irrespective of discrimination) gender parity in the boardroom is such a significant social benefit that it justifies "positive discrimination".
Post reply on HN