3 ms·
> Also, half of the Jrs we hire are women. We could never do that if we only hired experienced talent. Not enough women even apply for those roles. You're givi
by steveeq1 9y ago
> Also, half of the Jrs we hire are women. We could never do that if we only hired experienced talent. Not enough women even apply for those roles.
You're giving preferential treatment to your recruits on the basis of their gender?
- redblacktree 9y agoI'm not the person you're replying to, but I took it to mean that they end up hiring about half women for those roles, not that the explicitly seek them out.
- jmvoodoo 9y agoNo. However we get more applicants that are women for the Jr roles and our hiring criteria matches them roughly as often as it matches men. For the sr positions 80% or more of applicants are men which roughly translates into 80% or more of hires being men. Pretty easy to see the math there without having to introduce any sort of preferential treatment.
- antisthenes 9y agoIt seems like men and women are applying to the junior roles in roughly equal proportion, while the applications to the senior roles might be more skewed to the tune of 80/20 or worse. Just ball-parking numbers, but that's what I got from his post.
- entered_val 9y agoWhy are you so eager to call out what you perceive as "preferential treatment" towards women that you ignore logic? It's beyond obvious that he meant half the people hired happen to be women. Are you that misogynist that reason doesn't matter?