4 ms·

I've handled the hiring of almost all Web developers within my company for the last half decade, and in that time I have hired absolutely zero women. Yet, this

I've handled the hiring of almost all Web developers within my company for the last half decade, and in that time I have hired absolutely zero women. Yet, this has nothing to do with discrimination and much more to do with the applicants themselves and the numbers by which they apply. During this time, I've seen Web design positions attract females applicants by about a two-thirds majority, whereas Web development positions attract only one in twenty (if that). And yet, those who have applied seem to fit into two distinct categories of undesirables: First, the designer, with a design degree, who learned to code from some two-week academy that now feels the need to apply for a position well beyond their skill level. Or second, the mathematics major (or similar) who feels their knowledge of topics only related to programming in general is satisfactory enough to hit the ground running as a Web developer of all things... So I'll be happy to discuss the potential of a wage gap if I ever seem to hire a true female Web developer.

watwut 10y ago
" the mathematics major (or similar) who feels their knowledge of topics only related to programming in general is satisfactory enough to hit the ground running as a Web developer of all things" All companies I worked for routinely hired guys like that assuming they will learn on the job. Most did, some did not. In any case, many professional programmers I see studied mathematics, physics or something similar and then changed career. Edited to add: it is possible that your company can not afford a bit longer learning curve in the beginning. Did not wanted to make it sound like I am accusing you. I actually thought that big difference between men and women is that men assume they can do tech by default, apply for jobs even as they have minimum qualification or experience and it oftentimes works out.
- msimpson 10y ago
  > it is possible that your company can not afford a bit longer learning curve in the beginning. That is exactly my point and what I would have replied, otherwise. I just cannot spend that level of non-billable time teaching.
spopejoy 10y ago
In truth, your real issue is you don't value an integrated workplace. Once you decide that it is a top priority to have a diverse workforce, you will find ways to attract, grow, and retain diverse talent. You clearly have not decided this is important to you, which is your choice. However, because you choose not to pursue it, you are now concluding that you are entirely blameless for your objectively abysmal performance in hiring women. That is not a valid conclusion. My experience is that once I chose to prioritize hiring women, a bunch of my own hidden biases, assumptions and yes, values, became clear. I realized that I had missed opportunities to hire women in the past. I realized that I had connected values I shared with people I hired as objectively "good" when in fact they just matched mine. I have a high opinion of my skills, so it's perhaps natural that I would do so, but in the end it actively hurt my abilities to recruit a diverse workforce. It was actually quite painful to realize I was the reason for not hiring women in many cases. The other thing to realize is women, like all humans, have their own biases, and instinctively suss out those organizations that are seriously hiring women, and avoid those that don't. So until you decide that you want to recruit women, and succeed in doing so, you will continue to have a terrible record for hiring women.
- msimpson 10y ago
  > Your real issue is you don't value an integrated workplace ... > You decide that it is a top priority to have a diverse workforce ... > You will find ways to attract, grow, and retain diverse talent ... > You clearly have not decided this is important to you ... > You choose not to pursue it ... > You are now concluding that you are entirely blameless ... > I chose to prioritize hiring women ... > I realized that I had missed opportunities ... > I realized that I had connected values I shared with people I hired as objectively "good" ... > I have a high opinion of my skills ... > I was the reason for not hiring women ... In truth, your real issue is that you project your own failures in an amazingly presumptuous manner. Whereas I merely left a comment detailing my factual observations regarding hiring for a specific type of position advertised equally to both men and women on services like LinkedIn and Craigslist.

watwut 10y ago

" the mathematics major (or similar) who feels their knowledge of topics only related to programming in general is satisfactory enough to hit the ground running as a Web developer of all things" All companies I worked for routinely hired guys like that assuming they will learn on the job. Most did, some did not. In any case, many professional programmers I see studied mathematics, physics or something similar and then changed career. Edited to add: it is possible that your company can not afford a bit longer learning curve in the beginning. Did not wanted to make it sound like I am accusing you. I actually thought that big difference between men and women is that men assume they can do tech by default, apply for jobs even as they have minimum qualification or experience and it oftentimes works out.

msimpson 10y ago
> it is possible that your company can not afford a bit longer learning curve in the beginning. That is exactly my point and what I would have replied, otherwise. I just cannot spend that level of non-billable time teaching.

spopejoy 10y ago

In truth, your real issue is you don't value an integrated workplace. Once you decide that it is a top priority to have a diverse workforce, you will find ways to attract, grow, and retain diverse talent. You clearly have not decided this is important to you, which is your choice. However, because you choose not to pursue it, you are now concluding that you are entirely blameless for your objectively abysmal performance in hiring women. That is not a valid conclusion. My experience is that once I chose to prioritize hiring women, a bunch of my own hidden biases, assumptions and yes, values, became clear. I realized that I had missed opportunities to hire women in the past. I realized that I had connected values I shared with people I hired as objectively "good" when in fact they just matched mine. I have a high opinion of my skills, so it's perhaps natural that I would do so, but in the end it actively hurt my abilities to recruit a diverse workforce. It was actually quite painful to realize I was the reason for not hiring women in many cases. The other thing to realize is women, like all humans, have their own biases, and instinctively suss out those organizations that are seriously hiring women, and avoid those that don't. So until you decide that you want to recruit women, and succeed in doing so, you will continue to have a terrible record for hiring women.

msimpson 10y ago
> Your real issue is you don't value an integrated workplace ... > You decide that it is a top priority to have a diverse workforce ... > You will find ways to attract, grow, and retain diverse talent ... > You clearly have not decided this is important to you ... > You choose not to pursue it ... > You are now concluding that you are entirely blameless ... > I chose to prioritize hiring women ... > I realized that I had missed opportunities ... > I realized that I had connected values I shared with people I hired as objectively "good" ... > I have a high opinion of my skills ... > I was the reason for not hiring women ... In truth, your real issue is that you project your own failures in an amazingly presumptuous manner. Whereas I merely left a comment detailing my factual observations regarding hiring for a specific type of position advertised equally to both men and women on services like LinkedIn and Craigslist.