Live data from Hacker News

Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs

axios.com

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs

#201
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only seems bizarre if you didn't consider DEI programs to be largely symbolic corporate puffery in the first place. For all of the hate they received from some political spheres they were largely just PR initiatives right from the start, especially in larger companies.

Do you actually have experience with those programs? Here's what DEI programs actually do in practice, in my experience. As a simple example, let's say there is an opening for a somewhat senior position, like a director. Your team does some interviews and wants to make an offer. DEI vetos it because every single candidate they interviewed was a white male. They don't tell you who to hire or not to hire, they just say…

> Do you actually have experience with those programs?

I was hiring manager at a "woke" (media) company during and after peak DEI.

The only policy of DEI that really affected me was that we had to have a "diverse slate of candidates" meaning, we had to interview at least one woman and (non asian) minority. This was actually a problem hiring engineers because we wouldn't be able to extend offers unless we'd satisfy the "diverse slate" meaning we'd miss out on candidates we wanted to hire while waiting for more people to interview. We could get exceptions but it'd be a fight with HR.

Asians didn't count as diverse because, in tech, they are not underrepresented. Basically "diverse" hires were women, AA, hispanic, etc.

Our company quietly walked back the "diverse slate" stuff years ago. In fact I think it was only in effect for like a year at the most.

The DEI stuff rolling out was highly performative. It wasn't in place for really long and quietly walked back. Now, the loud walking back of policies that probably haven't been enforced in years is also performative. In both instances it's companies responding to the political moment.

Re: Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs

#202
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the company has NO ONE's interests at heart Except for shareholder value

> Except for shareholder value Well, it depends. Zuckerberg has controlling interest in Meta even though he owns a minority of it ( Google has a similar structure.

Semantics. I'd replace "shareholder value" with "making a chunk of people insanely wealthy".

Re: Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs

#203
> Diverse Slate Approach. This practice has always been subject to public debate and is currently being challenged

These challenges are always in bad faith. It starts off by assuming this practice is exclusionary of white males. We know that's not true, because that would (obviously) be illegal (Title VII) and these companies are not dumb.

> there are other ways...

Like what? Why won't those "other ways" be immediately challenged by the same bad faith actors?

Re: Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs

#204
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only seems bizarre if you didn't consider DEI programs to be largely symbolic corporate puffery in the first place. For all of the hate they received from some political spheres they were largely just PR initiatives right from the start, especially in larger companies.

Do you actually have experience with those programs? Here's what DEI programs actually do in practice, in my experience. As a simple example, let's say there is an opening for a somewhat senior position, like a director. Your team does some interviews and wants to make an offer. DEI vetos it because every single candidate they interviewed was a white male. They don't tell you who to hire or not to hire, they just say…

Not really true. We have been asked to hire women in our team. Thankfully we found an amazing person. But other teams were not so lucky. It was pure nonsense.

Re: Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs

#206
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just common sense, or should be. Unfortunately common sense is as uncommon as people tend to joke about. So you get a lot of focus on business hiring practices, even though it's literally impossible to hire candidates that don't exist. Sometimes this gets taken to absolutely farcical levels. I recall reading a blog from an Irish writer about how activists were trying to demand that companies there hire black…

One of the smartest people I know almost quit software her first year out of school, because her all-male team spent an afternoon teasing her about how they were going to start a strip poker game and they think she'd be "a natural", or some nonsense like that. Do you think such dynamics introduce barriers to female participation in tech? Do you think focusing solely at the "bottom of the funnel" could still result in…

I hear stories like this, but now after 25 years in the industry, no place I've worked at would have ever tolerated this, nor have I seen or heard this happen from colleagues. Granted I've worked mostly in California, but still seems so foreign to me.

Re: Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs

#208
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only seems bizarre if you didn't consider DEI programs to be largely symbolic corporate puffery in the first place. For all of the hate they received from some political spheres they were largely just PR initiatives right from the start, especially in larger companies.

Do you actually have experience with those programs? Here's what DEI programs actually do in practice, in my experience. As a simple example, let's say there is an opening for a somewhat senior position, like a director. Your team does some interviews and wants to make an offer. DEI vetos it because every single candidate they interviewed was a white male. They don't tell you who to hire or not to hire, they just say…

> consider more candidates who might not fit your preconceived notion of what you thought a person in that role should look like.

This sounds like a terminally online Twitter user's idea of how people do hiring.

It's also funny to consider when 70%+ of H1Bs are Indian men. Tech companies just have subconscious bias for hiring both brown men and white men, but not black or yellow ones to complete the Blumenbach crayon set.

This kind of rhetoric is why we're seeing a pendulum swing in the other direction instead of a sane middle ground. But at least it's finally becoming trite to make these claims with a straight face.

Re: Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs

#209

This comment is based upon n two assumptions: 1) Twitter has imploded, and is on the road to Myspace level relevance 2) that implosion is due to a removal of moderation I'll try to keep it politically neutral. But this and other Facebook announcements means inexorable collapse is on the medium term horizon, because they mirror what Twitter did These actions could possibly be done with social network circa early to mi…

> It means not only will left-wing people run away in droves, but then toxicity explodes and successive waves of moderates and apolitical people get driven away. Left-wing people haven't left twitter. Some extreme Democratic Party partisans, many with histories on twitter too ugly and venomous to possibly clean up, have left twitter. Others have created accounts on Bluesky, but still post twice as often on twitter as…

I'd be curious to see the same graphs for X / Threads, but I don't think we'll ever get that data.

Re: Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs

#210
post #88

DEI was a song and dance that companies put on for the media, politicians, investors, employees, and the public at large. Now anti-DEI is a song and dance for the exact same reason. If you have been in the business long enough, you will know that the company has NO ONE's interests at heart. Never had and never will. They will discriminate against any race they have to, whether majority or minority, if it leads to an…

This take is cynical to the point of wilfull ignorance. My spouse works in DEI and I guarantee you her and her coworkers are sincere and trying to instill better, less biased hiring practices and to make everyone feel welcome and part of the team. Not everyone is going to be the same but that's like anything else. Being 100% dismissive is as much of a mistake as being 100% unquestioningly accepting.

I believe the comment is implying that having DEI programs at all was a song-and-dance put on by the C-suite; not that your spouse is insincere in their work.

Put differently: the C-suite set up these programs (and hired very sincere people to work in them) but never really actually cared about the outcomes.

Post reply on HN