[deleted]
Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
11–20 of 22 posts
Re: Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
#12'Ellis, who has a degree in applied mathematics and a minor in computer science, had experience in back-end development. But “Google assigned her to an occupationally-segregated frontend engineering role”, the suit said.'
Personal data point: I have a B.S. in Mathematics and a Master's in Bioinformatics (taken after 7 years of PhD study), and I had over three years of backend professional experience when I was hired at Google as a Level 3 in frontend engineering (I was told I was going to a backend position with "lots of math" when I first accepted the offer). Before I left Google I mentored a Noogler who was hired as a Level 3 despite having just finished a PhD in CS.
My point is that Google is filling slots with bodies, very smart bodies, but that it is incredibly common to come in for a level you are overqualified for and a role you are unsuited for.
Re: Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
#13During your interview, you can demonstrate strong technical skills even if you aren't asked about them. You can also demonstrate strong soft skills. The latter is generally seen as less 'merited' and generally gets paid less.
I wonder how this kind of information can be qualified other than a full transcript of everyone's interviews.
Re: Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
#14I want to treat carefully as this is a hot button issue - and I'm not trying to defend Google at all but: >>But other male software engineers who were less qualified than Ellis or at the same level were promoted into Level 4 and higher positions, according to the suit. What is the proof that this is the case? Did Google admit that these candidates were "less qualified" than Ellis, or is it just the perception? Just b…
Honest question: Is note taking in interviews seen as necessary? I've always found it to be somewhat insulting when the interviewer has their head in their laptop or paper pad, and types furiously while I realize I'm already stumbling. It's a terrible dynamic, and I've tried to avoid doing that _aggressively_ in my own interviews; be engaging the interviewee, following along/trying not to seem distracted. I'm hard pressed to think about material subtleties that I'd miss in the time before I'm able to go to my desk and write up a summary post-factum.
(This is tangential to the core thrust, but as an eng trying to do my part to make interviewing less of a pain, this stood out to me)
Re: Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
#15Just my suggestion, and probably a far out there one...
I offer that people should be put in front of a machine with facial recognition and the most advanced AI available that can conduct a one on one interview with a person to determine if they meet the qualifications for the specific job they are applying to.
This would be controlled by a 3rd party who has no ties to any employer and would be used more as a data gathering tool that produces results of a person's interview and compares it to other people who interviewed as well, obscuring name obviously but providing gender and race breakdowns, among other things. people could possibly view this data after they've had the "real" interview with Google or whomever and compare with what was determined by their interview with the AI system. The 3rd party could provide this data to the public on a monthly or yearly basis so that everyone can know, possibly, if there is an incredible amount of bias that an interviewer may hold toward any particular people or groups of people.
Of course, there's 1000's of caveats to this and companies like Google would have to provide how they conduct their interviews to said 3rd party, as well as techniques and what they expect in a person's personality but wouldn't it at least be better than having people constantly reject the notion that there is a discrimination and bias problem in and out of the workplace? Not to mention it would all but eliminate the need for lawsuits for this kind of thing, unless one disagrees wholeheartedly with 3rd party AI results and actual interview results.
Re: Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
#16I want to treat carefully as this is a hot button issue - and I'm not trying to defend Google at all but: >>But other male software engineers who were less qualified than Ellis or at the same level were promoted into Level 4 and higher positions, according to the suit. What is the proof that this is the case? Did Google admit that these candidates were "less qualified" than Ellis, or is it just the perception? Just b…
> Did Google admit that these candidates were "less qualified" than Ellis, or is it just the perception? My guess would be perception. Honestly though, is more "qualified" the absolute end goal of any job? Thinking back to extracurricular activities in high school or college, the most qualified person didn't always get the spot - whether it be a sport, band, cheerleading, whatever. Sometimes people who weren't the be…
It often boils down to something that is hard to quantify- i shall call it "initiative"- the attempt not only to answer a question perfectly (like anyone can from school) but to peek beyond and show, one is interested in where the playing fiel ends and the swamp beginns. One can not fake that, one can not learn that, its honest interest into a field and if those borders come up in a interview..
Re: Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
#17I want to treat carefully as this is a hot button issue - and I'm not trying to defend Google at all but: >>But other male software engineers who were less qualified than Ellis or at the same level were promoted into Level 4 and higher positions, according to the suit. What is the proof that this is the case? Did Google admit that these candidates were "less qualified" than Ellis, or is it just the perception? Just b…
Honest question: Is note taking in interviews seen as necessary? I've always found it to be somewhat insulting when the interviewer has their head in their laptop or paper pad, and types furiously while I realize I'm already stumbling. It's a terrible dynamic, and I've tried to avoid doing that _aggressively_ in my own interviews; be engaging the interviewee, following along/trying not to seem distracted. I'm hard pr…
> Is note taking in interviews seen as necessary?
It's increasingly common at companies that have highly standardized/calibrated interview processes. Often, this is for the express purpose of avoiding discrimination. Interviewers have to ask approved questions, measure them according to specific criteria, then express their evaluation in terms of a number and be prepared to justify it. That allows the numbers for different candidates to be compared meaningfully, like to like. The downside is that it's impossible to do all that without taking notes.
Re: Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Did Google admit that these candidates were "less qualified" than Ellis, or is it just the perception? My guess would be perception. Honestly though, is more "qualified" the absolute end goal of any job? Thinking back to extracurricular activities in high school or college, the most qualified person didn't always get the spot - whether it be a sport, band, cheerleading, whatever. Sometimes people who weren't the be…
Personally I believe there's more to a good hire than good-on-paper qualifications. But when you hinge your argument and lawsuit on objective qualification then the burden of proof would lie on the accuser to prove its true.
But wouldn't the accuser need the data that only the accused, Google in this case, has - the positions and salaries by gender that Google refuses to divulge to the Department of Labor in a separate case over government contracts?
Re: Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
#19I want to treat carefully as this is a hot button issue - and I'm not trying to defend Google at all but: >>But other male software engineers who were less qualified than Ellis or at the same level were promoted into Level 4 and higher positions, according to the suit. What is the proof that this is the case? Did Google admit that these candidates were "less qualified" than Ellis, or is it just the perception? Just b…
[deleted]
Re: Google 'segregates' women into lower-paying jobs, stifling careers, lawsuit says
#20Why is this flagged?