31–40 of 158 posts
The CEO said 'listen, we don't have the time or money for stuff like that right now. We're not profitable. Let's turn this ship around and we'll revisit.'
This gave me the sense that it's just seen as a frivolous expense to most companies, and pretty big respect to the CEO for admitting as much.
The idea of activists/politicians having any say in who companies hire disgusts me. The average person might thing of them as professional useless people. But as someone who lives in a somewhat corrupt country, I fear it's far more sinister. Here, after every government change, public worker positions and state universities tend to get filled with by the winner with their incompetent cronies. But the private sector i…
The idea of activists/politicians having any say in who companies hire disgusts me But does it disgust you when companies discriminate based on age/gender/sexual orientation/race/disability/religion/etc? Should corporations be accountable to society in some way, or do we trust them to "do the right thing"?
I worry that this is just messaging to build towards 'make DEI jobs immune from layoffs'. eg the quotes from comments: > "Instead, he said companies should consider race, gender and ethnicity when deciding who to let go." > 'Only software engineering and data science jobs saw larger declines, at 24% and 27%, respectively.' So the "hard" jobs are actually facing larger layoff waves than the DEI jobs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not a pipeline problem https://www.fastcompany.com/90596325/its-time-to-debunk-the-...
I didn't listen to the full podcast, but as someone who has spent much of my work time in the past few years trying to hire -- it seems surprising to hear its not a pipeline problem. I advertised and solicited from as many diverse venues as I could find and still found hardly any qualified applicants. In fairness it wasn't easy to find White or Asian qualified applicants too, but still found disproportionately more.…
So if you were e.g. recruiting for SWE roles at an HBCU presumably there are hundreds of CS students there. Are you saying none were qualified? If so isn't that a problem with education/preparation?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking of it more like, if you look at who you're planning to layoff and it is 50% white females -- and your employee population is only 20% white female... then you should probably take a look at why. Has some unintended bias crept into your decision making.
The reverse, however, could also be true---how did you get all those fireable white females in the first place?
The idea of activists/politicians having any say in who companies hire disgusts me. The average person might thing of them as professional useless people. But as someone who lives in a somewhat corrupt country, I fear it's far more sinister. Here, after every government change, public worker positions and state universities tend to get filled with by the winner with their incompetent cronies. But the private sector i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea of activists/politicians having any say in who companies hire disgusts me But does it disgust you when companies discriminate based on age/gender/sexual orientation/race/disability/religion/etc? Should corporations be accountable to society in some way, or do we trust them to "do the right thing"?
Isn't that already illegal to discriminate based on most of those things?
My previous company got rid of DEI stuff a couple years back, when the previous CEO left. Only one or two people even noticed, and one had the nerve to complain on an all hands. The CEO said 'listen, we don't have the time or money for stuff like that right now. We're not profitable. Let's turn this ship around and we'll revisit.' This gave me the sense that it's just seen as a frivolous expense to most companies, an…
The problem with a lot of the DIE stuff that I've seen is that it is usually targeted at the ICs and first level managers, just like the ethics training, and the sexual harassment training.
Whereas that stuff is very rarely perpetrated by the rank and final, it's usually the execs that need the training. Why is DIE any different, after all if it was really important to the execs there would be easy ways to make it happen, shoving everyone in trainings seems like performative work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea of activists/politicians having any say in who companies hire disgusts me But does it disgust you when companies discriminate based on age/gender/sexual orientation/race/disability/religion/etc? Should corporations be accountable to society in some way, or do we trust them to "do the right thing"?
In the US there are already laws against this. The company doesn't need DEI positions to enforce this.
I can hire all of x gender, x race, x religion, etc. for my 1000 employee work force. You won't legally be able to nail any kind of discrimination on me so long as I take care as to not leave evidence of it.
In this instance, did discrimination occur? Did the law do its job adequately?