Live data from Hacker News

Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

nytimes.com

371–380 of 626 posts

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#371

High school, college, any STEM fields are all overwhelmingly biased in terms of favoring women. 57% of college graduates are women. Men are not only getting the short end of the stick but are being told by every voice that they are privileged, it’s their fault, they are bad whereas women have sooooo many extra programs and positive reinforcement to succeed. No one with a straight face can tell me women in entry level…

> areas with primarily male coworkers, and creepy bosses

This describes basically every tech job I have ever had. Real life engineering woman here reporting in.

In 2014 I joined a series B startup as engineer #15 and was the only woman in the office other than the admin; food delivery dudes often brought things to my desk, assuming I must be the office mother. When I was late to work one day after being groped by a strange man on Caltrain, my supervisor questioned my commitment to meeting deadlines. When I moved on, they returned to being a 100% straight white male company.

In 2015, I was the first female engineering hire at the new office of a growing mid-size tech company. A second woman wasn't hired until we'd reached a headcount of about 20. Men, especially clients, often forgot my name. E.g. Janice vs Janet vs Jan (none of these my real name, but you get the idea. The point is that I wasn't important enough to these men to remember.)

Fast forward a few years. Now I am by far the most senior of four engineering ladies at the satellite campus of a household name tech company. Total headcount at this office is about 100 engineers.

I have never had a female manager.

For those keeping score, I have never worked anywhere with more than 5-10% female engineers. For my entire career, even as a noob, I have been the most senior female engineer I know.

I count myself lucky because I've never had to deal with anything resembling actual harassment. (It helps that I am not conventionally attractive). But there is a psychological burden of always feeling alone, always being the first or only, worrying that your actions will be taken to represent all people of your kind, and wondering if assholes in your midst think you've only got where you've gotten because you're a woman.

Your dismissive attitude toward women's supposed advantages is as common as it is damaging. Whatever unfair advantages you think your women colleagues have, unless you are black or latinx, it is unlikely you will ever experience the feelings of isolation and otherness that most women deal with throughout their tech careers.

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So then what is the issue here. I'm hearing "no the issue is that the data was looked at wrong and they really do discriminate against women". Now I'm hearing that "it doesn't matter that there are significant numbers of both underpaid women and underpaid men" from you. I guess it's not very clear to me what you think the issue is here.

Are you confusing me with someone else?

I'm not sure, but you seem to be asking many questions in a pointed manner on this topic, while offering no answers or even interpretations of your own.

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of places with pay transparency and they work just fine. The information imbalance is only to the benefit of the employer.

> There are plenty of places with pay transparency and they work just fine. The information imbalance is only to the benefit of the employer. Citations?

Public servants. Sweden. Buffer.

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lack of parental leave policies in most software firms that would allow their partners to stay at home should a child be born in their household, I've never heard of such a policy, or perhaps I'm misunderstanding your comment. Are you suggesting that companies should have policies that affect what the spouses/partners of employees do in terms of caring for children? Why would an employer have any right to say what…

Amazon has exactly such a policy.

Wow, indeed they do. [1] Do any other companies? The original comment indicated that such policies were not common at software companies, but Amazon is obviously a software company...

1: https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/amazon-parenta...

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll repeat points that aren’t my original ideas, but are painfully obvious here. It’s very simple what it’s become: sexist against men. This is what happens when you aim for equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity. I believe we’re in a Kantian second stage. We were sexist against women. Now, we’re sexist against men. The hopeful third step

Kantian second stage For those who slept through the philosophy class, what these stages are?

Thesis, antithesis, synthesis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#Hegelian_dialectic

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[edited for typos and grammer] Anecdotally, I've run a couple of tech conferences and know others who have as well fairly recently. We've made a point to hold workshops for under represented groups, had the Codes of Conduct, make a lot of extra effort to reach out to women as speakers etc.. In the end, we would get 5 to 10 times as many talk submissions from men, accept nearly all of the talks by women (often turning…

I’ll repeat points that aren’t my original ideas, but are painfully obvious here. It’s very simple what it’s become: sexist against men. This is what happens when you aim for equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity. I believe we’re in a Kantian second stage. We were sexist against women. Now, we’re sexist against men. The hopeful third step

[deleted]

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#377
post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll repeat points that aren’t my original ideas, but are painfully obvious here. It’s very simple what it’s become: sexist against men. This is what happens when you aim for equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity. I believe we’re in a Kantian second stage. We were sexist against women. Now, we’re sexist against men. The hopeful third step

> This is what happens when you aim for equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity. People throw this accusation around all the time, but it doesn't make much sense. Outcomes are the only holistic way to measure opportunity. If you're seeing one group getting lesser outcomes, there are only two possibilities: Their opportunities are being artificially limited somewhere , or one of the groups is simply bet…

There's a third possibility: men and women really do have different interests. Further evidence for this comes from the observation that:

The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/02/the-more...

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#378

High school, college, any STEM fields are all overwhelmingly biased in terms of favoring women. 57% of college graduates are women. Men are not only getting the short end of the stick but are being told by every voice that they are privileged, it’s their fault, they are bad whereas women have sooooo many extra programs and positive reinforcement to succeed. No one with a straight face can tell me women in entry level…

[edited for typos and grammer] Anecdotally, I've run a couple of tech conferences and know others who have as well fairly recently. We've made a point to hold workshops for under represented groups, had the Codes of Conduct, make a lot of extra effort to reach out to women as speakers etc.. In the end, we would get 5 to 10 times as many talk submissions from men, accept nearly all of the talks by women (often turning…

Reminds me of Electroconf. A GitHub conference where they did blind selection in an effort to avoid biases. Everyone selected ended up being male. Someone complained on Twitter and they had to cancel the whole event.

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#379
post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is what happens when you aim for equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity. People throw this accusation around all the time, but it doesn't make much sense. Outcomes are the only holistic way to measure opportunity. If you're seeing one group getting lesser outcomes, there are only two possibilities: Their opportunities are being artificially limited somewhere , or one of the groups is simply bet…

There's a third possibility: men and women really do have different interests. Further evidence for this comes from the observation that: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/02/the-more...

That doesn't seem like a third possibility — it sounds like the same thing as "The groups who haven't traditionally been in power are in that position because they are innately less capable."

It's theoretically possible that women just generally suck at computers, but if that's someone's argument, I'd prefer they come out and actually make the argument instead of throwing around smokescreens about "equality of outcomes vs. equality of opportunity."

Re: Google Moves to Address Wage Equity, and Finds It’s Underpaying Many Men

#380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[edited for typos and grammer] Anecdotally, I've run a couple of tech conferences and know others who have as well fairly recently. We've made a point to hold workshops for under represented groups, had the Codes of Conduct, make a lot of extra effort to reach out to women as speakers etc.. In the end, we would get 5 to 10 times as many talk submissions from men, accept nearly all of the talks by women (often turning…

I’ll repeat points that aren’t my original ideas, but are painfully obvious here. It’s very simple what it’s become: sexist against men. This is what happens when you aim for equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity. I believe we’re in a Kantian second stage. We were sexist against women. Now, we’re sexist against men. The hopeful third step

I think I prefer dynamic systems view. We're oscillating. We've been under the target, overcorrected, and we're above the target now. Like always in (widely-understood) politics, this will be met with another overcorrection; all we can hope for is that there's dampening in the system, so that we'll converge on target at some point.
Post reply on HN