4 ms·

What percentage of those populations have the requisite secondary education and or experience (coding, statistics, marketing, electrical engineering) to work at

What percentage of those populations have the requisite secondary education and or experience (coding, statistics, marketing, electrical engineering) to work at Google? Before you try to just match up a general population to a workforce let's at least try to have a representative sample of what the "pool of qualified applicants" looks like.

sin7 9y ago
I assume you are saying that Blacks and Hispanics will not meet the educational standards. Asians will and they are under represented. The level of the problem doesn't matter. Working at Google is an elite job. We could go a level lower to Stanford. Asians are under represented at Stanford. We could go down a level to an elite California High School. Asians are still under represented. Blacks and Hispanics are really under represented at this level. It only gets worse for them the lower you go at elite institutions. I use the general population because that is where the workers are coming from. If the pool of qualified applicants does not match the general population, then somewhere the qualification process failed.
- GCU-Empiricist 9y ago
  > If the pool of qualified applicants does not match the general population, then somewhere the qualification process failed. That's an interesting conclusion, statistically and as a societal commentary. Assuming for a second we take your conclusion as given, and we look at the legal liability question that someone in alphabet legal or HR has to be thinking about when the make hiring policy decisions: which population should their workforce be representative of: the base population, or the population of qualified applicants? Edit: >I assume you are saying that Blacks and Hispanics will not meet the educational standards. Asians will and they are under represented. I don't care I'm here for the legalities and statistics discussions, see my other comments here about judging people based on melanin or Genetics. It's silly where it isn't insulting to reduce a real person based on their inclusion/exclusion to poorly defined groups with little to no impact on actual ability to perform/qualify.
- cwperkins 9y ago
  The guy asked a question, can we stop making these assumptions? It's childish, it's more constructive to provide the statistics the inquirer asked for.

sin7 9y ago

I assume you are saying that Blacks and Hispanics will not meet the educational standards. Asians will and they are under represented. The level of the problem doesn't matter. Working at Google is an elite job. We could go a level lower to Stanford. Asians are under represented at Stanford. We could go down a level to an elite California High School. Asians are still under represented. Blacks and Hispanics are really under represented at this level. It only gets worse for them the lower you go at elite institutions. I use the general population because that is where the workers are coming from. If the pool of qualified applicants does not match the general population, then somewhere the qualification process failed.

GCU-Empiricist 9y ago
> If the pool of qualified applicants does not match the general population, then somewhere the qualification process failed. That's an interesting conclusion, statistically and as a societal commentary. Assuming for a second we take your conclusion as given, and we look at the legal liability question that someone in alphabet legal or HR has to be thinking about when the make hiring policy decisions: which population should their workforce be representative of: the base population, or the population of qualified applicants? Edit: >I assume you are saying that Blacks and Hispanics will not meet the educational standards. Asians will and they are under represented. I don't care I'm here for the legalities and statistics discussions, see my other comments here about judging people based on melanin or Genetics. It's silly where it isn't insulting to reduce a real person based on their inclusion/exclusion to poorly defined groups with little to no impact on actual ability to perform/qualify.
cwperkins 9y ago
The guy asked a question, can we stop making these assumptions? It's childish, it's more constructive to provide the statistics the inquirer asked for.