Talking about the additional compensation - "Men account for about 69 percent of the company’s work force, but they received a disproportionately higher percentage of the money." Doesn't this imply that men, per capita, were being underpaid more than women?
Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
191–200 of 626 posts
Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
#192Talking about the additional compensation - "Men account for about 69 percent of the company’s work force, but they received a disproportionately higher percentage of the money." Doesn't this imply that men, per capita, were being underpaid more than women?
Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
To use a sports analogy: Two people could each have 5 years of experience playing baseball, but one is in a AAA league and the other plays for an MLB team. Years of experience doesn't necessarily say anything about actual skill.
You just told me that Google is the MLB. I don't see any evidence for this. Many great software companies exist. You are working on the assumption that everyone applying to Google is coming from low-rate companies. Further, if I get hired into the MLB from an AAA team, it's likely I am playing at a professional level. I might get a rookie contract upfront, but that doesn't mean that my skill level is that of a rookie…
Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
#194Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
#195Reminiscent of Simpson's Paradox, the most famous example being a gender discrimination lawsuit alleging UC Berkeley discriminated against women in admissions (57% men vs. 43% women). It turned out there WAS bias - in favor of the women! "The lawsuit triggered a study. The study results showed that not only were women not discriminated against, but that women had a statistically significant advantage! Here’s what hap…
Exactly what I thought. How this is even considered a paradox is a paradox to me. Human beings just have very strange presuppositions regarding probability and statistics that are almost always wrong.
Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
To use a sports analogy: Two people could each have 5 years of experience playing baseball, but one is in a AAA league and the other plays for an MLB team. Years of experience doesn't necessarily say anything about actual skill.
You just told me that Google is the MLB. I don't see any evidence for this. Many great software companies exist. You are working on the assumption that everyone applying to Google is coming from low-rate companies. Further, if I get hired into the MLB from an AAA team, it's likely I am playing at a professional level. I might get a rookie contract upfront, but that doesn't mean that my skill level is that of a rookie…
Say what you will about Google, but I don't think it's a very controversial opinion to say they do hire a lot of the best software engineers, and they are very good at it.
Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
#197> it found that more men than women were receiving less money for doing similar work
NY Times needs to learn the difference between absolute numbers and rates. This is awful reporting.
Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No one with a straight face can tell me women in entry level tech programs are not incredibly favored. All my below average coder friends that are women got awesome jobs with high salaries extremely easily. Yes, I talk with them and they agree with what I’m saying. .... and yet, how many workplaces have an engineering team which are 50% female? 25% female? 10% female? 5% female?
I’d wager it’s the same as the composition of females in any Engineering program. If there were 25 women in your CS program out of a 100 (being generous), they can’t magically multiply and somehow end up 50 in the workforce. No one is forcing them to NOT join a STEM field. Everyone is telling them to specifically join STEM and giving likely billions of dollars in support aiding the increase.
Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
#199The gender wage gap is real in the sense that there is a gap, but when you analyze it, they are comparing apples to oranges. I'm sure everyone here knows this. https://data.oecd.org/earnwage/gender-wage-gap.htm The countries with the highest wage gaps are the countries with the most equality in the workplace. Women in Korea are not treated poorly. The important thing though is the people proposing that the wage gap i…
Yeah, I am not sure what to think of the data. It's not what I would expect.
How is US, Canada, Austria having such a large gender wage gap, followed by Canada.
Then Greece, Bulgaria and Romania are all the way on the left. Having lived in Eastern Europe, I would not consider it overall a bastion of women's equality and rights, not according to the West European standards at least. Granted though, during the Soviet times women and girls were studying math and science just as well as the boys even if not better and it was never specifically promoted or pushed via a "women in STEM" or such similar programs I have seen here, it just happened. Perhaps there is a remnant of that mentality and maybe there is something to be learned from there.
Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? Just publish who makes how much money. That’s it.
IMO, companies should not be allowed to keep salaries private but I do think employees should be able to keep their own salaries private. I don't want coworkers or the public to know my income for all sorts of reasons. It's just not anyone else's business. This whole notion that the only way for someone who thinks they aren't paid enough to get a raise is to know everyone else's salary and then use that as leverage i…
People are trading their time based on certain assumptions, including the viability of the company; seeing the company's books is a vital way to do that.
"Trust me" is a shitty position for companies to put workers in, and yet we see again and again how they go under and leave people (individuals, families, etc) in the lurch.
Secrecy never benefits the person in the weaker position.