4 ms·
Because they're not declining candidates because of their gender. They're hiring from talent pools where both genders are more properly represented. None of th
by eganist 9y ago
Because they're not declining candidates because of their gender. They're hiring from talent pools where both genders are more properly represented.
None of this stops a candidate from applying to duolingo directly. There's no discrimination going on against humans, and discriminating against a school is totally fine so long as there's no suspect reason to do so (e.g. discriminating against Howard because they've got primarily African-descended students).
Not a lawyer. Would welcome a legal opinion.
- adamnemecek 9y agoThis seems to be some double speak.
- eganist 9y agoInteresting. What didn't you understand?
- adamnemecek 9y agoYou misunderstand. I'm saying you just restated something illegal in a way that might make it seem less illegal when it fact it's not.
- fixermark 9y agoDoes title IX dictate where a company is required to focus its talent recruiting process?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- trendia 9y ago> Not a lawyer. Would welcome a legal opinion. I would highly recommend reading at least the Wikipedia article on "Disparate Impact." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact
- phkahler 9y ago>> Because they're not declining candidates because of their gender. They very clearly make the case that they are biased in favor of women -> over men. You might think that 50/50 means equality, but up front they state that there are only 18 percent women in the field. In order to achieve 50% women in their workforce they have to be biasing the hiring process. It seems strange to go out and write publicly about doing so.