Google Sued by Ex-Recruiter Alleging Anti-White, Asian Bias(bloomberg.com) |
Google Sued by Ex-Recruiter Alleging Anti-White, Asian Bias(bloomberg.com) |
Seems odd that both that and the post about google's poorly implemented gun filter were removed from front page.
Diversity means many things, not just gender and ethnicity. Some of the biggest blind spots I’ve noticed in Silicon Valley companies come from lack of diversity in age and class.
Diversity should be about inclusion, not about exclusion. All people involved in hiring should understand the (common-sense, in my opinion) boundaries set by the Civil Rights Act. Regardless of what you might think when reading certain parts of tumblr or twitter, “only accept new L3 candidates that are from historically underrepresented groups” is not forward thinking or progressive. To the extent that it is what it appears to be—slightly coded language for filtering resumes based on gender and race—it’s illegal.
There are so many brilliant people out there, often overlooked. Graduates from un-fancy colleges. Engineers a few years from retirement, but unsatisfied with their current job. A high school contest coder looking for an internship. A person from a poor family who bootstrapped thru community college. To me, diversity is about taking the extra effort to find excellence everywhere, rather than just looking in the default places.
It might not be hard to convince a jury that it would be 80 or 85% if Google stopped all pro-diversity measures. It might be hard to convince them to penalize Google for it, though.
(FWIW, I'm on a team that consists solely of white and Asian males, and everyone on my chain is a white or Asian male, all the way to the top.)
At a first glance the racial category "white" on its own is obviously underrepresented at Google both relative to the population of California and relative to that of the United States.
California is ~79% "white" (2005 data here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_California ) whereas Google is only ~56% "white" (2017 data here: http://fortune.com/2017/06/29/google-2017-diversity-report/ ).
You cannot have racial diversity without massive discrimination if the source is biased.
The allegation is that Google was systematically dismissing candidates who fell into a certain (protected) class, from being even considered at a certain stage of the interview process. That's illegal.
You mention you are asian so would you prefer working in an office with 100% ethnic asians or 100% ethnic indian. Even just assume that both are culturally citizens of the country.
If they actually want diversity they should fix the problems at source not discriminate.
Would there be a point where the negatives of diversity can outweigh the justice (Which i assume is something along the lines of offering employment to those who otherwise wouldn't be offered)?
That's my expectation.