Okay.... First, /r/jobs skews towards young people just getting started, and further skews towards people who are having trouble finding a job. Those who aren'

Okay.... First, /r/jobs skews towards young people just getting started, and further skews towards people who are having trouble finding a job. Those who aren't having trouble don't bother posting rants about it. So you can point to a 100 complaints there, it doesn't mean its a representative sample of all job-seekers. Selection Bias. I mean even BASIC statistics would say at least count what PERCENTAGE of posts are "I cant get a job" relative to the total. Just finding 10 posts saying "I can't get a job" means there are 10 people in that situation .. it says almost nothing about the market except that there are 10 frustrated people. Unrepresentative Sample. Companies don't offer feedback on why they rejected candidates because of legal issues. OP - now that you are a recruiter, are you going to give candidates feedback even when HR tells you never to do that because it might get you sued? Are you willing to put your job on the line and risk getting your company sued? If not, then perhaps you understand why it is the way it is.. The point about not enough "diverse" candidates in hiring channels. Again, refuting it by saying women are so MUCH MORE DETERMINED is 1. bullshit stereotyping (there are no gender differences, remember???), 2. doesn't address the point. If roughly 20-25% of CS majors are women (look it up), OF COURSE the hiring pool will tend to reflect the same ratio - 2/10 women, 8/10 men. When the pipeline is skewed all the way starting from school/college, it will remain skewed in jobs too. The employers cannot fix the pipeline. Biased Population => Biased Sample. Your own linked article shows 28% CS majors are women, and 28% of people with jobs in IT are women!! Does not sound particularly biased to me.... how about learning some statistics before ranting? Also, believe it or not, everyone gets rejected from jobs they are qualified for. There are only so many spots.. and many more candidates. So many who pass the minimum bar will get rejected because a better qualified candidate came along! A whole lot of frustration does not make an argument. I agree the hiring process IS broken because of clueless recruiters, low salaries, ridiculously high interview bars etc. But uninformed rants don't help. Of course, some will call me a sexist... as if I can only be on "team diversity" or "team sexist". The (statistical) truth is much subtler than either of those poles. I'm on "team look at the data without a pre-conceived notion of what you want to find". I agree some of the problems she mentions with hiring are there. I am against this particular article because its very poorly thought through. Its twisting facts and collecting anecdotes to suit a pre-determined narrative.