Live data from Hacker News

Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

reuters.com

11–20 of 90 posts

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#11
post #5

To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…

[deleted]

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#12
post #5

To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…

Companies have a huge influence over the distribution of who applies by the wording and placement of their job adverts.

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#13

I wish the article had more details on why the propositions were rejected. It makes sense though, Alphabet is there to make money not foster an ultra political working environment. After the Damore incident, I wouldn't consider working there, but this does offer some hope to those who aren't far-left leaning.

I wonder how you came to the determination that those who support equality are far left, rather than just left?

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#14

Why do companies hire all these diversity administration in the first place? It burns epic amounts of money, and sows discontent, when there message and answer to everything is we need more diversity for all leadership and tech positions,(aka quotas of people with subpar skillsets). Instead of merely hiring on skill.

Radical activists bullying everybody else is why. Good to hear Google are being rational about it.

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#15
post #5

To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…

Watch out for variance too.

If variance is different in the two populations then a high hiring bar will overweight the high variance population.

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#16
post #5

To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…

I had this misconception too & Google has not had 50/50 parity as a goal (unsure about specifically what this proposal is but I don't think it establishes quotas either). The discussion has been centered about reaching parity with the available talent pool as you describe. It's even in the article:

> Eileen Naughton, who leads Google’s HR operations, said the company remains committed to an internal goal to reach “market supply” representation of women and minorities by 2020, which could help bring hiring in line with the diversity of the candidate pool.

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#17
post #5

To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…

[deleted]

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#18
post #5

To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…

Because "society" is made up of (among others) companies, and Google is a large company. The way things change in a society is when the members of society start to change them.

If a company with the weight and power of Google feel something is wrong and isn't doing their damnedest to try to fix it, then it won't change.

Now, from the linked piece, it's unclear exactly what has been proposed, so I'm not offering an opinion about whether it's a good idea or not -- merely answering the question in the general. For the record, I'm broadly sympathetic to the notion that fixing diversity starts rather a bit upstream from internal Google-policies.

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#19
post #5

To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…

> If you have a fever because of a bacterial pneumonia, antibiotics are much better than Tylenol.

You also don't go "but don't have tylenol to break the fever because there's a root cause too," because an unchecked fever is itself damaging to the brain. And you especially don't do that if the root cause is unknown, unclear, or will take a long time or is impossible to cure.

The root causes here are complex and will take decades to undo. Dismissing efforts in the meantime to address the symptoms is effectively dismissing the harm these systemic problems cause now.

Re: Alphabet shareholders reject diversity proposal backed by employees

#20
post #5

To what extent should diversity be the responsibility of companies? I would argue the responsibility is in proportion to added-discrimination, so to speak (kind of like your profit should be in proportion to your added value). So, as an example, if 90% of your applicants are male and 10% are female, presuming quality is randomly distributed, the default assumption is that the company ends up with 90% male employees a…

Building off your example, the company going out of their way to try and bridge this gap could hypothetically alleviate the 90/10% gap in the future. The gap is in part caused by women not having the same role models higher up in the STEM world to look up to and follow. In this case, Google is part of the society that leads to your gap in applicants and can definitely make a difference through their hiring policies.

I completely understand the other side that this may not necessarily lead to the most qualified candidates being hired though. It is a difficult topic to discuss, and we just don't know yet what effect equal hiring policies have because they should more strongly affect future generations.

Post reply on HN