Nope. I rarely skip phone interviews - I might do it if it's a referral from someone I know really well and the candidate is local or in-town, but over the past 5 years that is the only circumstance that I can remember skipping that step.
While I'm not and haven't worked in a "top tier" tech company, I've spent my entire career in other "top tier" companies in my industry, as well as with a highly regarded consulting firm. Those experiences have taught me that people I don't want to work with can come from or be anywhere. If I don't already know you, or trust someone else that really knows you, we're going to talk on the phone.
I'll do a cursory walk thorough your experience, since we'll focus on that if we move to on-site, but I'll spend 30-60 minutes talking to you. I'm looking for solid communication ability primarily, using stories about motivation, goals, how you work alone and with others, team experiences, etc. This part is always the candidate's to "lose" more than me actively trying to screen out - I'll bring you on site if we have a good conversation and I walk away with an understanding of your story and a mutual agreement that you're in the ballpark for the role.
Plus, as others have pointed out in the thread, it is good to have a consistent process for all candidates. Not just to avoid unconscious bias, but to have the right data points in the decision. I'm not doing you (or me) any favors by skipping the phone screen, if at the end I get down to two very technically strong candidates, but I also know that the one I phone screened has a solid ability to communicate over the phone (which is a good proxy for working across campuses and such). Then I have to decide if I go back and do a phone interview with you, which is awkward after the on-site or just hire the other person.