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

Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 464 posts

Re: Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

#311

Post by sol_remmy »

mlevental wrote: post #122
heisnotanalien wrote: post #93

What about if you are white working-class man? Is a middle-class black woman less privileged than a white working-class man? What about short versus tall people? What about beautiful versus ugly people? The halo effect is well-known. The whole thing is just absurd and dehumanising.

yes: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/03/10/white...

> White high school dropouts are wealthier than Hispanic college graduates.

What I'm seeing is "people who have lived in America for a long time (European heritage) are on average wealthier than people who arrived fairly recently from third world countries (Hispanic heritage).

Why is that surprising? Why is that a problem?

Re: Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

#312

Post by Slansitartop »

gedy wrote: post #71
wand3r wrote: post #30

> In a statement, Google said that it would “vigorously defend this lawsuit,” adding that it has a “clear policy to hire candidates based on their merit, not their identity. At the same time, we unapologetically try to find a diverse pool of qualified candidates for open roles, as this helps us hire the best people, improve our culture, and build better products.” This sounds contradictory.

It sounds like they are splitting hairs to say that they aren't discriminating in hiring, but in the candidate pool they gather.

I wonder how that'd pass muster if it was the other way around. I can't imagine a company that discriminates against black applicants getting a pass because they say their interview process is fair, but they just throw most of the black resumes in the trash before it starts.

Re: Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

#313

Post by JustAnotherPat »

daxorid wrote: post #233
colmvp wrote: post #126

I have to say, as an Asian male I found this comment by dirtyid in the article to be succinct and all too true: > "Pour one out for Asian males. Get screwed by affirmative action in education, media representation and now employment but can't get screwed on dating apps." Asian men constantly get grouped as a single entity when it comes to tech and aren't considered an added element of diverseness within the industry…

Given this (correct) understanding of what "diversity" really means in American culture, why do you think it is that Asian-Americans overwhelmingly vote for pro-diversity policies?

because the alternative is to vote for an overwhelmingly pro-white party.

Re: Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

#314

Post by throwaway1584 »

southphillyman wrote: post #88

Companies should clearly articulate how diversity programs work. It seems like people don't understand that diversity outreach programs don't create an advantage for minorities, instead they level the playing field as once closed pipelines get opened/discovered. I fear that all this recent news about diversity and Google will create an environment where perfectly qualified non Asian minorities won't feel welcomed or…

Almost anyone working in tech has seen race and gender discrimination in favor of women and minorities at this point. I have personally experienced it.

If we were to apply affirmative action then class would be a better differentiator than race or gender. As it stands now an upper-middle-class Ivy League educated person of the right identities will receive affirmative action over a man that worked his way up from a poor neighborhood in Bangalore. I fail to see how that is just.

Re: Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

#316

Post by thr0waway1776 »

colmvp wrote: post #126

I have to say, as an Asian male I found this comment by dirtyid in the article to be succinct and all too true: > "Pour one out for Asian males. Get screwed by affirmative action in education, media representation and now employment but can't get screwed on dating apps." Asian men constantly get grouped as a single entity when it comes to tech and aren't considered an added element of diverseness within the industry…

Serious question - why is affirmative action always OK when Asians bear the coast but not OK otherwise?

- Why isn't there affirmative action in the NBA? There are practically no Asian basketball players, they should lower the standards until more Asians get accepted, and there should be a quota.

- Why isn't there affirmative action in the US Presidential Cabinet? There are practically no Asian policymakers

- Why isn't there affirmative action in Hollywood? There are few no Asian actors aside from the classic stereotyped actor nerd/goofball/terrorist/etc

Re: Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

#317

Post by HelloNurse »

plebian79878 wrote: post #163

I am a female engineer. All of this is so frustrating because whether what Google is doing is right or wrong (and I do have opinions on that to come) about how they are going about this, regardless, this kind of media buzz belittles the general view of value add of female engineers like me. I work really hard, and I don't want to be given extra breaks, or have the bar lowered. I would rather fail an interview (and I…

What good are these discriminatory efforts to hire "diverse" people? They are essentially programs to hire technically mediocre people; even the most actually progressive employer is going to think "maybe this woman chose Google because she couldn't be hired on merit elsewhere".

Re: Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

#318

Post by DoofusOfDeath »

kelukelugames wrote: post #151
DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you in general, but I'm curious how many would be "enough"?

A supreme court justice was asked the same question. I don't agree with it completely but think it's an interesting opinion. >Rosen: Why is it good for men—as you said recently, there should be nine women on the Supreme Court … >Ginsburg: No, I didn’t say there should be. The question was when will there be enough, so there’ll be enough when there are nine. >For most of our history, except the times the court was les…

Perhaps Ginsburg's point was that 9 is definitely enough, but she's addressing what the smallest number for "enough" is?

Re: Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

#319

Post by thr0waway1776 »

soreasan wrote: post #197
colmvp wrote: post #126

I have to say, as an Asian male I found this comment by dirtyid in the article to be succinct and all too true: > "Pour one out for Asian males. Get screwed by affirmative action in education, media representation and now employment but can't get screwed on dating apps." Asian men constantly get grouped as a single entity when it comes to tech and aren't considered an added element of diverseness within the industry…

As an Asian male this article also frustrates me. Google has always been a company I've wanted to work for but if this article is true and Google discriminates against Whites and Asians in their hiring process then they're not the dream company I previously believed they were.

Oh, and check out their incredibly diverse board of directors: https://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/company-officers/GOOG...

/sarcasm

Re: Ex-Google recruiter: I was fired because I resisted “illegal” diversity efforts

#320

Post by sol_remmy »

spunker540 wrote: post #64
wand3r wrote: post #30

> In a statement, Google said that it would “vigorously defend this lawsuit,” adding that it has a “clear policy to hire candidates based on their merit, not their identity. At the same time, we unapologetically try to find a diverse pool of qualified candidates for open roles, as this helps us hire the best people, improve our culture, and build better products.” This sounds contradictory.

It’s not. The idea is that when evaluating/interviewing an applicant it’s strictly merit based. But when reaching out to potential candidates on LinkedIn, choosing how to represent the company on campuses and at conferences the company can choose to act in ways to bring in more underrepresented applicants. So without changing their hiring standards, they can hopefully still increase the diversity of the pool of appli…

That violates that "Equal Opportunity" clause if you exclusively reach out only to certain groups
Post reply on HN