5 ms·
But there is no data that shows women or south asian workers are less productive. However, there is data for age, so much that in many countries there is manda
by omeid2 8y ago
But there is no data that shows women or south asian workers are less productive.
However, there is data for age, so much that in many countries there is mandatory driving test with ever shorter intervals as you grow older. This isn't discrimination or a risk factor that jumps overnight once you pass certain age, it is simply decline of cognitive and physical capacity as we age.
I am not saying people should be fired because of their age, but if people who are subject to firing happen to be mostly aged, what is the solution?
- ajross 8y agoWe're talking about programmers in their 40's here, not retired drivers with dementia. Please cite the study where these workers are less productive. I'll wait. You're just taking on faith that these employers are making completely rational judgements that just "accidentally" affect a disadvantaged group. First, that's shockingly naive: what they're really doing is preferentially terminating these people because they are paid more (i.e. punishing them for being part of the system that gave them those raises in the first place). Second, it's directly refuted by the linked article! IBM didn't accidentally fire a bunch of older workers. They fired a bunch of old workers, knew what they had done, and tried to hide it.
- Consultant32452 8y agoThe same issue works the opposite direction. If you're so sure she discrimination is harmful to the companies doing it, why do you have a problem with them biasing themselves out of business?
- ajross 8y ago...because I'm more concerned with the welfare of the employees fired than I am with the abstract darwinian fitness of their employers? I mean, it's not abstract: I'm in that demographic. And while my job seems stable right now, I'd like not to be fired because I'm 47, thank you very much.
- Consultant32452 8y agoWhat are you willing to give up in exchange? If the employer can't end the relationship because they got a better offer, are you willing to offer the same in return? If you get better hours and more money, can we decide you're not allowed to take that offer?
- eropple 8y agoUh. No? The people working at a business matter more than that business. This just is not that hard to noodle out.
- mnglkhn2 8y agoUhh, get with program, young lad, the shareholders matter more and not you, the employee. Unless it is a company owned by its employees. So maybe this is one of the answers: coops competing in the market.
- mnglkhn21 8y agoUhh, get with program, young lad, the shareholders matter more and not you, the employee. Unless it is a company owned by its employees. So maybe this is one of the answers: coops competing in the market.
- Consultant32452 8y agoIt's confusing to me that you want to subsidize a relatively wealthy demographic at the expense of the young and relatively poor.
- ajross 8y agoMy salary is renegotiated every year. If my employer truly thinks they can get a better offer they can reduce my salary to whatever they think my market rate is. Obviously they don't, because that kind of strategy is, well, completely batshit if you want to run a successful business. Yet you're saying that the same thing is just fine if the business waits for a "lay-off" and then preferentially fires me for reasons having nothing to do with performance?
- jacksnipe 8y agoMake it illegal, which the U.S. has done, and prosecute companies which do it. There is a very long history of exploiting labor in the U.S. This country was built on it (slavery, railroads, etc...). If this behavior is not curtailed, history tells us that it will be exploited more than it is engaged in innocently.
- sodosopa 8y agoThat's a huge jump from mandating driver reevaluations in > 70 year olds to cutting a 50 year old programmer to make room for two 25 year old entry level javascript developer.