4 ms·
> you get hundreds of companies that will reject a more qualitifed male for a less qualified female because she will make the workforce more "diverse" I have n
by jmcgough 9y ago
> you get hundreds of companies that will reject a more qualitifed male for a less qualified female because she will make the workforce more "diverse"
I have never ever ever heard of this happening, as much as some people like to scream "preferential treatment" with no evidence.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Sorreah 9y agoI have never been in a company that didn't want more women joining, and every time I've heard people talk about potential recruits women were prioritized (and objectified usually but that's besides the point).
- leesalminen 9y agoConversely, I have. I can think of one hiring discussion I participated in where a candidate's gender was considered because HR was asking questions about diversity of the dev team. Don't underestimate HR's CYA tendencies.
- greenshackle2 9y agoFor a single case study, see what happened with speaker selection for GitHub ElectronConf. After gender-blinding their process, they found they had too many men to their liking, so they re-did the process to have a more pro-woman bias. (But I don't think this is indicative of the industry as a whole.)
- ghaff 9y agoWith conferences specifically, if you don't make specific efforts to get more diversity (across any axes you care to name) generally, you may (probably will) end up with neither the range of perspectives or topics you'd like. This isn't limited to gender by the way. At many conferences, it means you end up with too many vendors pitching their wares (because that's their job) and fewer customers who actually use products.