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

Tech's DEI backlash is here

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 221 posts

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#121

Post by pdimitar »

yieldcrv wrote: post #74
lopkeny12ko wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However the other side of the equation, if there some aspect of the workplace ( such as say every important meeting are at 8 AM) are needlessly preventing certain people of expressing their talent... we should also look into it. This is a disingeuous point of comparison, because this is a behavior that can easily be corrected. Just set an alarm clock like everyone else. On the other hand, I cannot correct the fact…

to strengthen your argument, you can acknowledge that no system we had was doing what you wish there are magical criteria like culture fit which is inherently discretionary and biased which should be penalized too DEI as you have experienced isnt a solution for that either one reality is that companies dont always need most the cognitively/physically qualified person. they need to tap into markets and revenue, compan…

> there are magical criteria like culture fit which is inherently discretionary and biased which should be penalized too

OK, I have been rejected once -- during the interview no less, not via an email after -- because I said I am not into Game of Thrones. Apparently everyone on the team's pass time was chatting about it. They openly told me I don't fit in because I don't like GoT, even though the interview before that was an exhaustive technical one and I passed with 93% score.

Whom should I contact so they get penalized?

You realize these are private companies and they are not accountable to how they achieve their results as long as the means are not illegal, right?

And you do realize suing them over this will take a huge amount of time and money? Money that most working people don't have?

> one reality is that companies dont always need most the cognitively/physically qualified person.

Whose reality is that? I haven't seen it ever. Business makes money by hiring N people with capability X, and not N*5 people with capability X/5. Otherwise business will go broke paying salaries to incapable people. Common sense.

I get that you are saying that you might need people who understand certain markets better and that's practically their only skill but... on a more general premise the statement "you don't always need the most qualified person" is just confusing.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#122

Post by pdimitar »

feedforward wrote: post #14
xvector wrote: post #4

> DEI [ensures] a firm or company attracts a diverse pool of talent, hires and promotes people without bias, and fosters positive working environments so all individuals can thrive. What an incredibly biased take by the author, who clearly has not worked at one of these companies and seen DEI in action. Having actually worked at big tech companies with DEI initiatives, there have been many instances when we have had…

> a grift on top of the hard work of those that actually drove a company to success Where does the profits and dividends sent off to the idle class aristocracy fit into this constellation? Your resentment seems to mostly be that some dufferent people might be at the workplace.

I am a straight white male and for 22 years of career I have never, not once, received profits and dividends as a working programmer.

Do with that info what you will.

My resentment stems from the fact that I have witnessed people being hired with 3x more lenient interviews and end up doing 5-10% of what I do while being paid 80-90% of the money. Of course I will resent that. Every working person would be resentful of that.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#123

Post by pdimitar »

As a guy in Eastern European who has worked 99% of the time in the EU market, I am very happy that I have almost never seen any DEI actions in person.

But the very few times that I did it left a very bitter taste; that otherwise well-sounding initiative was hijacked to hire much less capable people who were commanding almost the same salary as mine or the other team members' while doing barely 10% of the work (vetted via code output and team discussion collaboration; nobody knew what that person was doing, even his direct supervisor who was also their coach buddy).

And it was doubly strange because the company actively went out of its way to look for these people, easily spending times more on hiring even single such person as compared to, you know, posting on several reputable job boards and filtering resumes.

I suspect it was investor pressure. Or the CEO getting a "life-changing experience" after watching a few videos.

Oh and you know what happened to those forced hires? Months later the CTO and two other seniors said "it's me or them" and had their resignation ready on the same day.

Turns out business interests do override some nebulous diversity targets after all. Take a guess who actually left / was fired? Exercise for the reader.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#124

Post by yieldcrv »

pdimitar wrote: post #121
yieldcrv wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to strengthen your argument, you can acknowledge that no system we had was doing what you wish there are magical criteria like culture fit which is inherently discretionary and biased which should be penalized too DEI as you have experienced isnt a solution for that either one reality is that companies dont always need most the cognitively/physically qualified person. they need to tap into markets and revenue, compan…

> there are magical criteria like culture fit which is inherently discretionary and biased which should be penalized too OK, I have been rejected once -- during the interview no less, not via an email after -- because I said I am not into Game of Thrones. Apparently everyone on the team's pass time was chatting about it. They openly told me I don't fit in because I don't like GoT, even though the interview before tha…

> on a more general premise the statement "you don't always need the most qualified person" is just confusing.

obviously its paradoxical because the person with the only skill that differs from the rest of the entire corporation would be the most qualified person. I tried to qualify that with other ways. I'm glad that we used language to convey a shared understanding, which is the purpose of language.

Regarding how to hold corporations accountable for hiring bias, I never broached that at all. "Culture fit" likely has a limited halflife, where legislatures or labor agencies will just discourage the word and that kind of discretion. labor agencies use their own budget from taxpayers or the state's other revenue sources to bring action to corporations, you should check them out, they might have found the Game of Thrones criteria to be window dressing for a sanctionable form of employment discrimination, that other people have already complained about. So that suggests your reality is either hyperbole or ignorance, easily remediable with accurate guidance.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#125

Post by Ekaros »

justinclift wrote: post #61
MyShawdowySelf wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Its whole premise is alleviating racism in the workplace No, as a non american living in the US i find american obsession with race fascinating. DEI is about every characteristic on which human can differ and how those difference play a role in the work place. Race is of course a factor , but so are neuro divergence, language, culture, gender and sexuality. Hell even things like "Don't schedule a meeting before 9 A…

> No, as a non american living in the US i find american obsession with race fascinating. Especially super weird is the hiring practises of (non-US) businesses OUTSIDE the US who've blindly copied this US DEI stuff without thinking if it even applies. Several major Australian universities (and some gov departments) practically don't hire white males any more. As several friends already working at these places have co…

Specially at the same time when we are seeing gender-ratios going the other way. For some reason we are not working hard to aim it squarely to match general population...

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#126

Post by annexrichmond »

narutosasuke wrote: post #118
annexrichmond wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Diversity is good for business. It's not clear to me that it is either good or bad for business. Why is this stated as a matter of fact. And please spare me links to studies funded by special interest groups. > You want people from different backgrounds and different ways of thinking. Define "different backgrounds". Why is only reduced to the color of someone's skin or sex? Why not people who grow up as Atheist, Ch…

> It's not clear to me that it is either good or bad for business. Why is this stated as a matter of fact. And please spare me links to studies funded by special interest groups. Not the poster and going to try to read the last sentence with positive intent. You can find the benefits in most industries where you are providing a product to be used by the general public. The design of products come from the vantage of…

> You can find the benefits in most industries where you are providing a product to be used by the general public.

I have background as an engineer in consumer products in SV for 10+ years

Indeed the elephant in the room is that the people designing these products often have little in common with people using them (outside of the Bay Area anyway) Financial status, affluent, well educated immigrants from China, India, etc.

I don’t see how DEI initiatives address any of that. It may actually be regressive in that regard.

> It also ignores what intelligent/hardworking means to each of us.

I think we agree on that part. But forcing a DEI model on hiring will take on the biases in the model itself.

It’s like delegating an individual’s bias to a group of people, who have their own bias. And it seems fruitless to me.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#127

Post by bad_username »

verdverm wrote: post #36

My $0.02 DEI is good in principle but poorly executed. Diversity is good for business. You want people from different backgrounds and different ways of thinking. But we have had a problem in tech of hiring only people like we already have, whether it be age, attitude, or race. At the same time, the DEI initiatives went too far. I am ok with racial targets that try to bring the company numbers closer to the local geog…

DEI is not good in principle. It rests on the ultimate conspiracy theory that any deviation from an "ideal" composition of a team or company must be the result of some active discrimination. It doesn't really bother proving this huge assumption before prescribing heavy-handed, costly and humiliating countermeasures. It rarely bothers justifying the "ideal" composition, either.

There IS discrimination in the workplace. The only good way to fight discrimination is to fight discrimination. Find it, prove it and target it. "There are too few women in tech" is as good a proof of discrimination as "There are too few woman in beick laying".

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#128

Post by aydyn »

Manuel_D wrote: post #97
OkayPhysicist wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, I've got plenty of white (or white passing) male friends who also ended up in roles with a shortage of work to do. There's this awkward period between someone being hired, and them being familiar enough with the workplace to actively seek out stuff that needs to be done that leaves a lot of people with very little to do.

My sister, though, had been in her role for 2+ years but still only had work to keep her busy maybe 30% of the time. Similar situation with one of my past girlfriends. These were both Product Managers - I think it's less of an issue for software developers, since there's always a backlog to hack away at.

Of course, because project management isn’t a real job, and it’s almost exclusively staffed by white women. Coincidentally.

Re: Tech's DEI backlash is here

#129

Post by aydyn »

dhriekeb wrote: post #82
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. I see what you are saying, but it totally discounts the value of diversity of thought. For example, there is an optical illusion where people see the top line as shorter: >—- However, they are the same length. (The illusion is more pronounced with hand drawn lines.) Everyone falls for this illusion across all countries and cultures, so much so that folks hypothesized it is affected by our biology. Well, until so…

[flagged]

No, there’s absolutely no proof that racial diversity directly benefits a company. I searched HARD for the evidence. Lots of articles claim it is true but purposely mistake correlation for causation.
Post reply on HN