7 ms·

It would be tempting to vote no on an otherwise qualified candidate citing "culture fit" who has Uber on their resume and a whiff of "bro dude" about them. Ulti

by spudlyo 10y ago

It would be tempting to vote no on an otherwise qualified candidate citing "culture fit" who has Uber on their resume and a whiff of "bro dude" about them. Ultimately though I hope I'd resist that temptation, because people deserve the benefit of the doubt; even young, white, physically fit dudes who enjoy sports and previously worked at Uber. I've worked with some nerds who were awful mean-spirited tyrants, and some bro dudes who were really kind and sweet.

sillysaurus3 10y ago
It would be tempting to vote no on an otherwise qualified candidate citing "culture fit" who has Uber on their resume and a whiff of "bro dude" about them. Ultimately though I hope I'd resist that temptation, because people deserve the benefit of the doubt; even young, white, physically fit dudes who enjoy sports and previously worked at Uber. If you substitute the gender or the color of "young, white physically fit dude" you get blatant racism or sexism. If someone did something wrong, then hold that against them. Being biased against someone's color or gender isn't ok.
- onion2k 10y ago
  I think there's a very big difference between being biased against race or gender and being biased against someone's work history. The whole point of interviewing and reading resumes is to filter people out (or in) based on their experience. If recruiters start tossing out resumes because they mention Uber that's not "discrimination" in any powerful sense; it's simply caution in the light of recent events.
  - strken 10y ago
    If it's about work history, then why mention that "even young, white, physically fit dudes" still "deserve the benefit of the doubt" if they "previously worked at Uber"? If someone reads a resume from a former Uber employee, and the evaluation process includes well, his parents came from Korea and he doesn't lift weights, so..., is that really a good thing?
    - muninn_ 10y ago
      Yes. It's striking to me how easily we're casually racist and sexist against white men. Not a good habit to start.
      - onion2k 10y ago
        At no point has anyone ever suggested white male developers will find it harder to get jobs because of their colour or gender. Refusing to employ a white male developer because they worked at Uber is not racist or sexist. It's "Uberist", but that's no different to being "Googleist" or "IBMist". Hiring managers are allowed to think people who worked in those cultures might have learnt things that make them a bad hire. To be honest, that's the hiring manager's job. I've said this on HN before - if you work for Uber and you're worried about it becoming toxic to your future career, speak up when you see the sort of behaviour other companies think make you a risky hire. You're perfectly placed to stop the problem. Speak up wherever you work. This problem isn't limited to Uber.
        muninn_ 10y ago
        You're right, but when people include "white bro dudes" and the like, that's casual racism/sexism.
        monksy 10y ago
        spudlyo's comment suggested that there should be a bias due to those attributes.
      - Frondo 10y ago
        It is not surprising to me, because of how privilege works. The people who look like the group that has all the power (white dudes) never really get confronted with real-world consequences for not looking like that... except for internet message boards, where, I guess, the painful consequence is being told they have privilege and should be more aware of what life is like for everyone else. But hey, if the price you pay for being a white dude is... being told on message forums that white dudes have the least difficult time navigating economic structures of modern life, but that's it, that's still a pretty sweet deal for white dudes. Of course, they'd rather not hear it at all. No one gives up power without a fight.
- chillwaves 10y ago
  Except the real qualifier is not being white and male, but working at Uber. Which could be construed as doing "something wrong".
  - mcguire 10y ago
    True. Doesn't everyone here have different expectations from a "young, white physically fit dude" from Uber and a YWPF woman from Uber?
    - strictnein 10y ago
      No.
- spudlyo 10y ago
  If you substitute the gender or the color of "young, white physically fit dude" you get blatant racism or sexism. I agree. If I did have a bias against white males I might consider it technically racism or sexism, but not blatant. In my view it's simplistic to think of bias based on gender or race as sexism or racism without considering the larger societal context. Can a historically dominant gender/race in a given society feel the occasional isolated sting of racism and/or sexism? I believe they can, but I also believe it's a false equivalency to view that with the same lens as the often systemic and institutionalized racism and sexism faced by those in the marginalized minority.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - ermir 10y ago
    Ah, so doing it against whites makes it okay then, because they are the "dominant" race.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - spudlyo 10y ago
      I think we're having an argument about semantics. I think it's a mistake to conflate racism with prejudice. I believe it diminishes the concepts of racism and sexism to invoke them in a non-systemic context.
      - JakeAl 10y ago
        When you are basing your prejudice on the color of one's skin it's racism. As it relates to hiring, it's unconstitutional and illegal in the US. People say "cultural fit" when it means they are discriminating based on age, sex, race, religion, personal beliefs or behavior that have nothing to do with being qualified to perform the work, which is what equal opportunity laws were established to prevent.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

by spudlyo 10y ago

sillysaurus3 10y ago

It would be tempting to vote no on an otherwise qualified candidate citing "culture fit" who has Uber on their resume and a whiff of "bro dude" about them. Ultimately though I hope I'd resist that temptation, because people deserve the benefit of the doubt; even young, white, physically fit dudes who enjoy sports and previously worked at Uber. If you substitute the gender or the color of "young, white physically fit dude" you get blatant racism or sexism. If someone did something wrong, then hold that against them. Being biased against someone's color or gender isn't ok.

onion2k 10y ago
I think there's a very big difference between being biased against race or gender and being biased against someone's work history. The whole point of interviewing and reading resumes is to filter people out (or in) based on their experience. If recruiters start tossing out resumes because they mention Uber that's not "discrimination" in any powerful sense; it's simply caution in the light of recent events.
- strken 10y ago
  If it's about work history, then why mention that "even young, white, physically fit dudes" still "deserve the benefit of the doubt" if they "previously worked at Uber"? If someone reads a resume from a former Uber employee, and the evaluation process includes well, his parents came from Korea and he doesn't lift weights, so..., is that really a good thing?
  - muninn_ 10y ago
    Yes. It's striking to me how easily we're casually racist and sexist against white men. Not a good habit to start.
    - onion2k 10y ago
      At no point has anyone ever suggested white male developers will find it harder to get jobs because of their colour or gender. Refusing to employ a white male developer because they worked at Uber is not racist or sexist. It's "Uberist", but that's no different to being "Googleist" or "IBMist". Hiring managers are allowed to think people who worked in those cultures might have learnt things that make them a bad hire. To be honest, that's the hiring manager's job. I've said this on HN before - if you work for Uber and you're worried about it becoming toxic to your future career, speak up when you see the sort of behaviour other companies think make you a risky hire. You're perfectly placed to stop the problem. Speak up wherever you work. This problem isn't limited to Uber.
      - muninn_ 10y ago
        You're right, but when people include "white bro dudes" and the like, that's casual racism/sexism.
      - monksy 10y ago
        spudlyo's comment suggested that there should be a bias due to those attributes.
    - Frondo 10y ago
      It is not surprising to me, because of how privilege works. The people who look like the group that has all the power (white dudes) never really get confronted with real-world consequences for not looking like that... except for internet message boards, where, I guess, the painful consequence is being told they have privilege and should be more aware of what life is like for everyone else. But hey, if the price you pay for being a white dude is... being told on message forums that white dudes have the least difficult time navigating economic structures of modern life, but that's it, that's still a pretty sweet deal for white dudes. Of course, they'd rather not hear it at all. No one gives up power without a fight.
chillwaves 10y ago
Except the real qualifier is not being white and male, but working at Uber. Which could be construed as doing "something wrong".
- mcguire 10y ago
  True. Doesn't everyone here have different expectations from a "young, white physically fit dude" from Uber and a YWPF woman from Uber?
  - strictnein 10y ago
    No.
spudlyo 10y ago
If you substitute the gender or the color of "young, white physically fit dude" you get blatant racism or sexism. I agree. If I did have a bias against white males I might consider it technically racism or sexism, but not blatant. In my view it's simplistic to think of bias based on gender or race as sexism or racism without considering the larger societal context. Can a historically dominant gender/race in a given society feel the occasional isolated sting of racism and/or sexism? I believe they can, but I also believe it's a false equivalency to view that with the same lens as the often systemic and institutionalized racism and sexism faced by those in the marginalized minority.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- ermir 10y ago
  Ah, so doing it against whites makes it okay then, because they are the "dominant" race.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - spudlyo 10y ago
    I think we're having an argument about semantics. I think it's a mistake to conflate racism with prejudice. I believe it diminishes the concepts of racism and sexism to invoke them in a non-systemic context.
    - JakeAl 10y ago
      When you are basing your prejudice on the color of one's skin it's racism. As it relates to hiring, it's unconstitutional and illegal in the US. People say "cultural fit" when it means they are discriminating based on age, sex, race, religion, personal beliefs or behavior that have nothing to do with being qualified to perform the work, which is what equal opportunity laws were established to prevent.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]