3 ms·

> In a statement, Google said that it would “vigorously defend this lawsuit,” adding that it has a “clear policy to hire candidates based on their merit, not th

by wand3r 9y ago

> In a statement, Google said that it would “vigorously defend this lawsuit,” adding that it has a “clear policy to hire candidates based on their merit, not their identity. At the same time, we unapologetically try to find a diverse pool of qualified candidates for open roles, as this helps us hire the best people, improve our culture, and build better products.” This sounds contradictory.

colanderman 9y ago
How? Creating a diverse pool of candidates, and selecting the most meritorious individual from that pool, are two separate stages in the hiring pipeline. Google's policy as stated in that quote is simply addressing the fact that entrenched network effects (known more popularly as "patriarchy" and "white supremacy") cause minorities – and, by extension, talented minorities – to be underrepresented in the hiring pool. It's entirely possible to enrich the hiring pool by focusing on minority outreach, yet still select from that pool the most meritorious candidate (who may or may not be a minority). Yesterday there was a comment on another story to the effect of, "I [male] wouldn't introduce myself to a group of two or more women at a professional conference, because I'd be the odd one out." The ultimate loss of networking opportunities for women and minorities which stems from such behavior is what Google's policy (as stated) seeks to correct. Reach out to those women (or minorities) who were denied a professional connection due to their gender/race/etc., so that they are granted a chance to be judged on their merit, alongside others for whom the opportunity to be interviewed came as easily as getting a sunburn or growing a beard. Granted, it sounds like what happened in the case in TFA was one of explicitly culling the pool to remove otherwise meritorious candidates based solely on their race, which is in conflict with the above policy statement.
spunker540 9y ago
It’s not. The idea is that when evaluating/interviewing an applicant it’s strictly merit based. But when reaching out to potential candidates on LinkedIn, choosing how to represent the company on campuses and at conferences the company can choose to act in ways to bring in more underrepresented applicants. So without changing their hiring standards, they can hopefully still increase the diversity of the pool of applicants and in turn increase diversity of the company. A lot of tech companies right now are adopting this diversification strategy.
- gedy 9y ago
  It's still discrimination though
- sol_remmy 9y ago
  That violates that "Equal Opportunity" clause if you exclusively reach out only to certain groups
gedy 9y ago
It sounds like they are splitting hairs to say that they aren't discriminating in hiring, but in the candidate pool they gather.
- Slansitartop 9y ago
  I wonder how that'd pass muster if it was the other way around. I can't imagine a company that discriminates against black applicants getting a pass because they say their interview process is fair, but they just throw most of the black resumes in the trash before it starts.
danmaz74 9y ago
I don't see any contradiction. Enlarging the pool - actively seeking people who might think they wouldn't be hired because of their background - looks to me like the best way to balance diversity. While excluding qualified candidates only because they're the wrong gender or color is exactly the wrong way to go.

by wand3r 9y ago

colanderman 9y ago

How? Creating a diverse pool of candidates, and selecting the most meritorious individual from that pool, are two separate stages in the hiring pipeline. Google's policy as stated in that quote is simply addressing the fact that entrenched network effects (known more popularly as "patriarchy" and "white supremacy") cause minorities – and, by extension, talented minorities – to be underrepresented in the hiring pool. It's entirely possible to enrich the hiring pool by focusing on minority outreach, yet still select from that pool the most meritorious candidate (who may or may not be a minority). Yesterday there was a comment on another story to the effect of, "I [male] wouldn't introduce myself to a group of two or more women at a professional conference, because I'd be the odd one out." The ultimate loss of networking opportunities for women and minorities which stems from such behavior is what Google's policy (as stated) seeks to correct. Reach out to those women (or minorities) who were denied a professional connection due to their gender/race/etc., so that they are granted a chance to be judged on their merit, alongside others for whom the opportunity to be interviewed came as easily as getting a sunburn or growing a beard. Granted, it sounds like what happened in the case in TFA was one of explicitly culling the pool to remove otherwise meritorious candidates based solely on their race, which is in conflict with the above policy statement.

spunker540 9y ago

It’s not. The idea is that when evaluating/interviewing an applicant it’s strictly merit based. But when reaching out to potential candidates on LinkedIn, choosing how to represent the company on campuses and at conferences the company can choose to act in ways to bring in more underrepresented applicants. So without changing their hiring standards, they can hopefully still increase the diversity of the pool of applicants and in turn increase diversity of the company. A lot of tech companies right now are adopting this diversification strategy.

gedy 9y ago
It's still discrimination though
sol_remmy 9y ago
That violates that "Equal Opportunity" clause if you exclusively reach out only to certain groups

gedy 9y ago

It sounds like they are splitting hairs to say that they aren't discriminating in hiring, but in the candidate pool they gather.

Slansitartop 9y ago
I wonder how that'd pass muster if it was the other way around. I can't imagine a company that discriminates against black applicants getting a pass because they say their interview process is fair, but they just throw most of the black resumes in the trash before it starts.

danmaz74 9y ago

I don't see any contradiction. Enlarging the pool - actively seeking people who might think they wouldn't be hired because of their background - looks to me like the best way to balance diversity. While excluding qualified candidates only because they're the wrong gender or color is exactly the wrong way to go.