Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google kills diversity hiring targets

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 300 posts

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#251

Post by pkulak »

imiric wrote: post #204
pkulak wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is that instead of just interviewing the people right next to you, who look exactly like you and have your exact background, you make the effort to interview a diverse set of candidates. Then you try to get rid of bias in the hiring process, and make the workplace somewhere that doesn’t make folks who are slightly different miserable. That’s it.

How does a company make an "effort" to interview a diverse set of candidates? There's an applicant queue not under their control, and a filtering phase at every step of the interview process. What you're suggesting is that companies favor candidates who have a different appearance or background than existing employees, which is the definition of bias and discrimination. This is based on ignorant beliefs that people w…

[flagged]

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#252

Post by [deleted] »

unsnap_biceps wrote: post #82
goalieca wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since education is a state level responsibility, why not handle it there? We don’t have a federal education ministry in Canada for instance.

The goal was to ensure that there was a more balanced result of education across the country. California can afford to spend way more per child than Kentucky can, so without some sort of federal level balancing, California's children are just going to be more likely to prosper than Kentucky's. This doubly applies to funds for disabled or underdeveloped children who needs extra support from the school system to be suc…

[deleted]

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#253

Post by [deleted] »

protocolture wrote: post #184
scarab92 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It surprises me that these programs were ever legal. It is strictly illegal in Australia to consider factors like gender or race when hiring. Even capturing these details from applicants is problematic in most cases. The compensation payable if caught can be enormous, in the order of a years salary per applicant. It’s not even necessary to prove that a specific applicant was discriminated against, simply having a pro…

I recall we have a specific carve out for Aboriginal and Torres Strait islanders, and I recall seeing specific hiring drives especially around the public service (I also am aware that elements of the federal government had a program specifically targeting autistic people too, which is also a protected characteristic) Theres also 2 forms these DEI programs took. 1. (The FAA Thing) where they specifically manipulated t…

[deleted]

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#254

Post by nosefurhairdo »

drusenko wrote: post #212
nosefurhairdo wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IBM executives are on record stating that hiring too many white or Asian men will cause hiring managers to lose bonuses. I have on good authority the same was true at Microsoft. They also required candidates who identify as non-diverse have their applications sorted behind some minimum number of diverse applicants. Finally, from the article in this post: > Google’s commitments for 2025 had included increasing the num…

As someone who has started a company that I grew to over 350 people, I’d like to understand how you’d propose solving a problem we faced without ever discussing race, gender or diversity in the context of hiring. The issue I faced is that monoculture in teams becomes increasingly self reinforcing over time to the point that it can be difficult to reverse, and then becomes problematic for hiring and retaining the best…

The idea that people aren't comfortable on a team that doesn't have other people matching their immutable sex/race characteristics, and that we should encourage this fragility is insane to me.

If this is the starting point, then wouldn't small, diverse teams be totally dysfunctional?

I have no sympathy for someone who can't work on a team of people of the opposite sex. In fact, in multiple jobs I've been the only man on an all female team. Not once did it occur to me that that could be a problem.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#255

Post by scarab92 »

baggy_trough wrote: post #185
scarab92 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It surprises me that these programs were ever legal. It is strictly illegal in Australia to consider factors like gender or race when hiring. Even capturing these details from applicants is problematic in most cases. The compensation payable if caught can be enormous, in the order of a years salary per applicant. It’s not even necessary to prove that a specific applicant was discriminated against, simply having a pro…

They never were legal, but people looked the other way. Now that will come back to haunt them.

Google owes Damore an apology.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#256

Post by moi2388 »

Eextra953 wrote: post #196
moi2388 wrote: post #186

Every pro DEI argument is “no true Scotsman”. Whereas in practice it’s just plain racism and discrimination. I’m sure in theory it’s all very nice. Just like communism.

Ya and every anti-DEI argument really boils down to it's not fair that a better candidate who isn't white got hired over me.

No. It boils down to “it’s not fair that a worse candidate got hired just because (s)he wasn’t white or Asian”

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#257

Post by htrp »

breakyerself wrote: post #244
scarab92 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It surprises me that these programs were ever legal. It is strictly illegal in Australia to consider factors like gender or race when hiring. Even capturing these details from applicants is problematic in most cases. The compensation payable if caught can be enormous, in the order of a years salary per applicant. It’s not even necessary to prove that a specific applicant was discriminated against, simply having a pro…

DEI programs favoring a specific race is the exception to the norm. DEI is supposed to be about stopping discrimination and bias. A common recommendation of DEI programs is to replace names with numbers so people looking at the resumes racial biases can't influence decisions.

until someone is president of $X ethnic group club on their resume

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#258

Post by srid »

This was brewing from last year.

From their "Mission First" post on Apr 18, 2024 https://blog.google/inside-google/company-announcements/buil...

> “ultimately we are a workplace and our policies and expectations are clear: this is a business, and not a place to act in a way that disrupts coworkers or makes them feel unsafe, to attempt to use the company as a personal platform, or to fight over disruptive issues or debate politics.”

Paul Graham had predicted it back in 2020: https://x.com/paulg/status/1781329523155357914

https://www.piratewires.com/p/mission-accomplished

And this was happening elsewhere too, for e.g.,

Microsoft: https://archive.is/p5Ewk

and

Meta: https://www.axios.com/2025/01/10/meta-dei-programs-employees... & https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42700134 ... even as early as 2022: https://world.hey.com/dhh/meta-goes-no-politics-at-work-and-...

For larger context, see https://www.wsj.com/business/c-suite/chief-diversity-officer...

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#259

Post by MadcapJake »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #152
strangeloops85 wrote: post #148

Independent of whether these goals are appropriate or not, these actions (and those of so many other companies) are just so predictably craven. These executive orders (and what "DEIA" exactly means or constitutes, legally speaking) have not been litigated or clarified yet. Is Google going to avoid interviewing anyone from a HBCU now? At least Costco seems to have a logical reason for what they do and stood by it.

> Is Google going to avoid interviewing anyone from a HBCU now? Why won't they? It's not like black people can't be hired anymore. It's just they have to compete like everyone else without being treated like disabled people.

> It's just they have to compete like everyone else

That's the whole point of DEI to ensure that *no one* is getting an unfair advantage because:

- their name is white https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2024/04/17/new-res... - recruitment is only occurring at certain places - or any other ways that bias can filter out perfectly good candidates

DEI is not about picking lesser candidates to fill quotas, it's about ensuring the human recruiters don't get in the way of the best talent joining your company.

Re: Google kills diversity hiring targets

#260

Post by scarab92 »

teractiveodular wrote: post #100
skywhopper wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Diversity targets are usually built around under-represented groups, not necessarily specific races.

The referenced Google diversity reports spell out the percentages of "Asian+, Black+, Latinx+, Native American+ and White+" (their terms). https://about.google/belonging/diversity-annual-report/2023/

In many countries it is illegal to even record such information about employees.
Post reply on HN