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

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

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 626 posts

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

#71

Post by bitwize »

magneticnorth wrote: post #48

I've talked to one expert about a similar result in a company where I worked, and the flip side to results like this is sometimes promotion velocity - women looked "overpaid" for their level relative to the men, and that was often because they had been at that level much longer than most men at the same level. If you set initial salaries fairly with respect to gender but promote men more quickly, then you end up with…

> women looked "overpaid" for their level relative to the men, and that was often because they had been at that level much longer than most men at the same level.

Usually it's the opposite but for the same reason: women seem underpaid but when you correct for experience on the job, they make something like 98 cents on the dollar compared to men.

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

#72

Post by sokoloff »

ordinaryradical wrote: post #39
sokoloff wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that Google's workforce is 69% men, it's quite possible that they found 3 men underpaid for every 2 women who were underpaid (60%/40%), which would mean they gave more men than women salary equity adjustments while still having a bias in the direction of the original complaint.

I think this is countered specifically here: > Men account for about 69 percent of the company’s work force, but they received a disproportionately higher percentage of the money. So they were compensated out of proportion with their demographic makeup of the company--they made up a larger share but needed more money to "catch up."

I think there's not enough information in the article to determine conclusively. Suppose men represent 75% of the compensation (due to senior ranks being skewed male more than lower ranks), 69% of the workforce, and received 72% of the salary equity increases. Were men or women "more" underpaid previously (assuming the equity increases themselves were "fair")?

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

#73

Post by bitwize »

nostromo wrote: post #31
danaliv wrote: post #12

Do read the fine article for the details: But the study did not tell the whole story of women at Google or in the technology industry more broadly, something that company officials acknowledged. Most significantly, it did not address ingrained issues that, according to workplace experts, cannot be overcome simply by considering how much different people are paid for doing the same job: Women and racial minorities oft…

> according to workplace experts The media really needs to stop this practice of just saying "experts say" without any attribution. I suggest when reading any article, when you read, "experts agree" or "sources say" or "critics have said" or "others are saying" -- just replace it with, "I, the author of this article, think ..."

"Some [who?] say..."

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

#74

Post by slg »

mpweiher wrote: post #66
slg wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You got too distracted by the Simpson's Paradox reference to see the actual Simpson's Paradox in play. As sokoloff [1] pointed out in a below thread, Google having an overwhelming male workforce means that there could still be a large bias against women at the same time that more man are being underpaid. There is simply not enough information presented in this article to know whether there is truly a gender bias (in…

> There is simply not enough information... Hmm... "Men account for about 69 percent of the company’s work force, but they received a disproportionately higher percentage of the money . " So, yes, we do have that information.

Yet we don't know what jobs women and men do at Google. There can be bias elsewhere in the system. For example women might be disproportionately hired as administrative assistants and men might be disproportionately hired as senior engineers. Both groups could then be compensated fairly and it would result in men receiving a disproportionately higher percentage of the money.

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

#75

Post by voctor »

wincy wrote: post #54
voctor wrote: post #33

Off-topic: Why almost all words in the title begin by an uppercase letter?

Are you asking in general? That’s one of the first things a student learns in middle school English is that the title is all capitalized except for words like “the, to, and, or”, unless those words are at the beginning of the title. This site looks like it has the rules more formalized, if you’re interested. I think it’s something most native English writers do without thinking by adulthood. https://capitalizemytitle…

I've often noticed this pattern but only ask myself now, so, yes, in general. From what I remember I never learnt that in school, but I'm obviously not a native English writer. @Raphmedia already gave me a good link, but thank you for the one you gave me too.

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

#76

Post by CydeWeys »

johnny313 wrote: post #36

> Kelly Ellis, a former Google engineer and one of the plaintiffs in the gender-pay suit against the company, said in a legal filing that Google hired her as a Level 3 employee — the category for new software engineers who are recent college graduates — in 2010 despite her having four years of experience. > Within a few weeks of Ms. Ellis being hiring, Google hired a male engineer for her team who had also graduated…

A lot of it depends on interview performance (which itself is an entirely separate can of worms, including potential gender factors). Many people who get hired on at a more junior level probably wouldn't get offers at all if they were mandated to be a more senior level based on years of experience.

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

#78

Post by izzydata »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #64

> In response to the finding, Google gave $9.7 million in additional compensation to 10,677 employees for this year. Doesn't sound like they were underpaying by very much...

On average $900 additional salary per employee. Probably not a huge raise for most of them.

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

#79

Post by akhilcacharya »

johnny313 wrote: post #36

> Kelly Ellis, a former Google engineer and one of the plaintiffs in the gender-pay suit against the company, said in a legal filing that Google hired her as a Level 3 employee — the category for new software engineers who are recent college graduates — in 2010 despite her having four years of experience. > Within a few weeks of Ms. Ellis being hiring, Google hired a male engineer for her team who had also graduated…

Isn’t Google known to downlevel everyone that doesn’t come from FB?
Post reply on HN