10 ms·

I'd hate to work somewhere knowing I was hired because the color of my skin and not my abilities. maybe less of an issue in non-brainy jobs, but in Tech I would

I'd hate to work somewhere knowing I was hired because the color of my skin and not my abilities. maybe less of an issue in non-brainy jobs, but in Tech I would feel more insecure not knowing if I got the job to fill a quota. This sounds rather disgusting to me.

manfredo 8y ago
Again, I really hope it's clear that we don't deliberately hire unqualified candidate because they're considered diverse. It only affects resume reviews and phone interviews which are basically coin tosses.
- jfk13 8y ago
  If those stages are "basically coin tosses", why do you bother with them? It'd be quicker and cheaper to toss a coin.
  - manfredo 8y ago
    To be more specific they do work to filter out candidates that unambiguously lack the required skills. But for candidates that do have the required skills it's more of a coim toss. Working through a coding question online filters out candidates that can't code or are not competent at coding. But for candidates who can code sufficiently well, it's kind of a coin toss. Maybe they just don't think of the solution in time and what not.
andrewl-hn 8y ago
In the case that parent commenter described, you would be invited to the interview based on your qualifications and your color, but would be hired based on your demonstrated abilities during the interviews.
- manfredo 8y ago
  I respect both sides to of this debate. If a candidate had a 2nd attempt at passing the phone interview (which we provide at higher rates to diverse candidates) then it is somewhat fair to say the candidate would not have been hired if they weren't diverse. But phone screens are very low signal. It filters out people that are not competent coders, but beyond that it's basically a count toss. We also provide 2nd phone interviews to people that have referrals. So you could basically frame this as saying we treat diverse candidates as though someone referred them to the company. Again, I can empathize with why people think this is unfair and maybe paternalistic. I also respect those who see it as a prudent measure to be inclusive. I'm Cuban myself, but I come from a very wealthy family and attended a premiere computer science university. I'm also pretty much visibly White (btw many Cubans do consider themselves White) I do sometimes feel awkward checking the "Hispanic or Latino". If a company gave me additional opportunity on the basis of my heritage the I don't think it's leveling any playing field. If anything, it's giving someone who's already coming from a position of advantage with an even bigger advantage.
kradroy 8y ago
At first I felt the same way because I may be a beneficiary of these types of policies. Who likes being a charity case? But then I realized that this is just work, and I don't really care. If it gets me closer to a comfortable retirement more quickly, so be it. Ends, means, etc. Edit: I'm speaking about opportunities in general. The selection policy described by GP would put me at a disadvantage because I have a completely Anglo name.
- rosterface 8y ago
  I'm Hispanic and have resigned myself to this as well. While I may benefit from getting a job, I'm still subjected to what I would consider racism which I have to publicly turn a blind eye to. I'll give an example: "Latinx" is not a thing. Yet, I need to listen to a lot of white and other non-hispanic people say it all of the time. It feels like someone just reached into our culture, ripped out its core identity and rebranded it (supposedly in our favor?). I dare not say anything about it though, part of accepting the job with the diversity bonus is that the same people that granted you that power can take it away at the drop of a hat.
  - kradroy 8y ago
    I grew up in a majority hispanic community, but I'm not hispanic. I find it very hard to say "latinx" because that's not the label used when I was growing up. However, "hispanic" is apparently exclusive and should be avoided. I've asked my hispanic friends what they think about "latinx". They all hate it and never use it themselves. One said of the recent PC wave: "This is all perpetrated by clueless people, almost all white, who tell us what problems we suffer from and how we should solve them." I fall into the LGBT bucket and that's a different minefield, but I can sympathize. I got off topic. Nonetheless I agree that if I were to constructively criticize these often misimplemented diversity initiatives, it wouldn't be well received. Meanwhile I'll let the compound interest do its thing.
    - manfredo 8y ago
      It's always awkward when the Anglo-sphere tries to see parts of the world with their racial lens. To be frank it's pretty ridiculous that we consider everyone from Asia to be the same race (literally 60% of the world population that encompasses people like this [1], this [2], and this [3] under one label, all three groups would probably see themselves as distinct races). My understanding is that "Latinx" refers to people that are ethnically Mexico, Central America, and South American (and some parts of the Caribbean like Dominican Republic). Whereas "Hispanic" broadly refers to people who are from Spain's former colonies in the New World. So "Latinx" refers to race, but "Hispanic" refers to culture and encompasses people of a variety of races. The US government is at least making progress. The US census disconnected "Hispanic" from the race category starting in 2010 [4]. So now people like me can appropriately say that I am racially white but also Hispanic. 1. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chinese+people&t=canonical&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chinese+people&t=canonical&iar=ima... 2. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tajik+people&t=canonical&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tajik+people&t=canonical&iax=image... 3. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=dravidian+people&t=canonical&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images\ https://duckduckgo.com/?q=dravidian+people&t=canonical&iar=i... 4. https://www.census.gov/topics/population/hispanic-origin/about.html https://www.census.gov/topics/population/hispanic-origin/abo...
OpieCunningham 8y ago
Subconscious bias means your concern is applicable regardless of your skin color or gender. If you’re a white male, you could easily have been hired simply because of your skin color and gender and not your abilities. Effectively, your point is moot. Maybe worry less about the thoughts and feelings of who hired you and focus on doing your best work.
- malvosenior 8y ago
  As an under represented minority in tech, I couldn't agree more with the parent post. I never want to bring up my race because I want to be judged on the output of my skills and not be propped up because someone thinks I add diversity points to the team. Sadly I've had to bring up my genetic background recently as a pure survival mechanism because people keep telling me to my face that they don't want to hire white men so I need to let them know I'm not white so I don't get instantly filtered out. The whole situation is ridiculous as I never had any problems with my race before "diversity" became talking point #1 (as a developer, raising money is another story).
  - OpieCunningham 8y ago
    I could be misunderstanding what you are stating, but it sounds like you are saying that when you were mistaken for white, and diversity practices did not exist, everything was good. But now that diversity practices exist, you need to preemptively point out that you are not white. Now that the conscious or subconscious race pre-determinant is shifting from "this person is white, ergo good" to "this is a person of color, ergo good", you are finding you benefit from clarifying that you fit the latter category, even if it appears as though you fit the former. This may be a "best of both worlds" situation for you. In any case, diversity hiring may mean that you will be excluded because you are mistaken for white - but that doesn't mean whomever you were excluded for wasn't more qualified than you.
    - malvosenior 8y ago
      I don't like it because I find the judging people based on their skin color extremely racist, yet I'm forced to support it due to the need to put food on the table. > diversity hiring may mean that you will be excluded because you are mistaken for white I consider this racism and it pains me to to have to play the game of the people committing it.
skj 8y ago
> I'd hate to work somewhere knowing I was hired because the color of my skin and not my abilities. Must be tough being a white male in tech, where people see you and don't automatically think you don't know what you're talking about. Imagine, being hired only because someone with equal qualifications missed out due to internal biases. I'd hate that too, good on you.
tomatotomato37 8y ago
I'd have to agree. I mean, lets imagine how this sounds by just swapping some words and tell me if it's still okay: >I suspect many companies wouldn't use this as it would make affirmative hiring policies more difficult. For example, recruiters at my company curate lists of names that are majority male, white, or Western (pulled from the census bureau) in order to try and determine which candidates are... can't think of a good word for here.
- manfredo 8y ago
  Although the population swapping test does enforce the Golden rule ("treat others as you'd like to be treated") it does fail to capture the fact that there are population-level disparities in education and other opportunities. I respect that many disagree with affirmative hiring policies, but just saying that it's be unacceptable to do the same thing to different races is a rather naive approach.
SolaceQuantum 8y ago
"For what it's worth I don't think our diversity hiring practices result in any lowered caliber of hires. Most of the affirmative hiring policies only affect resume review and technical phone interviews." As the post being responded to.
pjc50 8y ago
Because of the way subconscious prejudice works, unless you put a finger on the scale in the other direction then all the white guys are hired (in part) because of their appearance.
- artificial 8y ago
  What I’m gathering from this strategy is the only way to fight racism is to practice it? If you don’t mind sharing, what are the quotas your company has in place for guaranteeing outcome?
- manfredo 8y ago
  Well, Asians are getting hired at ~3x the rate of Whites in Bay area tech firms. So it can't just be benefitting Whites. In fact, at many Bay area companies Whites are a minority. Not that I'm trying to grind an axe here, but it is pretty much counterfactual to say that explicitly meritocratic hiring benefits Whites above all others. For what it's worth I think this question about hiring practices is welded to the the question of whether equality of opportunity vs. equality of outcome. It's really the question of "is it okay to create unequal opportunities to engineer more equal outcomes?" Questions like these have no static answer. Rather, society develops and continuously evolves a consensus about what the right answer is.
  - stirfrykitty 8y ago
    Every Asian I know in IT works ridiculous hours compared to their white counterparts. Ditto Indians. Americans in general (IT can be different) want to work their 8 and bail. I also fall into this category. I have a union mentality towards work. It's also why I demand an hourly rate over a salary. If I have to work, you are paying me. Texas employers seem happy to accommodate me. My wife, who is medical, also demanded and got an hourly rate, and she's expensive.
    - tdhoot 8y ago
      This sort of reasoning by a hiring manager would be a great example of bias against white people.
haha9993 8y ago
if you think hiring is a fair meritocracy you are naive. Good looking people tend get hired more often. Get higher salaries. And getting hired is often about good your network is. And the richer you are or your parents are, the likelier you are to get an internship or a coveted job because you are around the "right" people. And there is also Cronyism, which I have realized is more prevalent that I thought as my career has advanced.
- malvosenior 8y ago
  And now we can add yet another mechanism that destroys meritocracy by being openly prejudiced against people based on their skin color and gender. Only the old forms of advantage still exist. The rich white men are still getting jobs based on their networks, but now poor and middle class white men are rejected purely based on who they are, not what they've done.
  - yongjik 8y ago
    Well, on the brighter side, when a poor/middle-class white guy gets hired, they no longer have to suffer the soul-crushing agony of "Did I get hired because of my skin color? What will my coworkers think of me?" What is good for the goose...
  - haha9993 8y ago
    how do you suggest we even out the playing field after 100s of years of institutionalized racism? institutionalized racism affects generation after generation. but somehow you want to tell those affected, "everything is fair now, move along"
    - malvosenior 8y ago
      As one of those affected (see my other comments on this thread), I want to be judged on the output of my work and not on my skin color.
      - haha9993 8y ago
Kluny 8y ago
As a woman with a physical disability, idgaf, I just want a job. I'm quite confident in my own abilities and require no external validation.
- CyberDildonics 8y ago
  As a more feminine woman with a greater disability, I feel the opposite way.
rchaud 8y ago
For any competitive position, you will have candidates with little to nothing separating them. Interviews are not standardized tests where there are easily measurable quantitative differences. Would you "hate to work" at a place if you found out you were hired because they thought "you were a good culture fit", rather than your actual abilities?

manfredo 8y ago

Again, I really hope it's clear that we don't deliberately hire unqualified candidate because they're considered diverse. It only affects resume reviews and phone interviews which are basically coin tosses.

jfk13 8y ago
If those stages are "basically coin tosses", why do you bother with them? It'd be quicker and cheaper to toss a coin.
- manfredo 8y ago
  To be more specific they do work to filter out candidates that unambiguously lack the required skills. But for candidates that do have the required skills it's more of a coim toss. Working through a coding question online filters out candidates that can't code or are not competent at coding. But for candidates who can code sufficiently well, it's kind of a coin toss. Maybe they just don't think of the solution in time and what not.

andrewl-hn 8y ago

In the case that parent commenter described, you would be invited to the interview based on your qualifications and your color, but would be hired based on your demonstrated abilities during the interviews.

manfredo 8y ago
I respect both sides to of this debate. If a candidate had a 2nd attempt at passing the phone interview (which we provide at higher rates to diverse candidates) then it is somewhat fair to say the candidate would not have been hired if they weren't diverse. But phone screens are very low signal. It filters out people that are not competent coders, but beyond that it's basically a count toss. We also provide 2nd phone interviews to people that have referrals. So you could basically frame this as saying we treat diverse candidates as though someone referred them to the company. Again, I can empathize with why people think this is unfair and maybe paternalistic. I also respect those who see it as a prudent measure to be inclusive. I'm Cuban myself, but I come from a very wealthy family and attended a premiere computer science university. I'm also pretty much visibly White (btw many Cubans do consider themselves White) I do sometimes feel awkward checking the "Hispanic or Latino". If a company gave me additional opportunity on the basis of my heritage the I don't think it's leveling any playing field. If anything, it's giving someone who's already coming from a position of advantage with an even bigger advantage.

kradroy 8y ago

At first I felt the same way because I may be a beneficiary of these types of policies. Who likes being a charity case? But then I realized that this is just work, and I don't really care. If it gets me closer to a comfortable retirement more quickly, so be it. Ends, means, etc. Edit: I'm speaking about opportunities in general. The selection policy described by GP would put me at a disadvantage because I have a completely Anglo name.

rosterface 8y ago
I'm Hispanic and have resigned myself to this as well. While I may benefit from getting a job, I'm still subjected to what I would consider racism which I have to publicly turn a blind eye to. I'll give an example: "Latinx" is not a thing. Yet, I need to listen to a lot of white and other non-hispanic people say it all of the time. It feels like someone just reached into our culture, ripped out its core identity and rebranded it (supposedly in our favor?). I dare not say anything about it though, part of accepting the job with the diversity bonus is that the same people that granted you that power can take it away at the drop of a hat.
- kradroy 8y ago
  I grew up in a majority hispanic community, but I'm not hispanic. I find it very hard to say "latinx" because that's not the label used when I was growing up. However, "hispanic" is apparently exclusive and should be avoided. I've asked my hispanic friends what they think about "latinx". They all hate it and never use it themselves. One said of the recent PC wave: "This is all perpetrated by clueless people, almost all white, who tell us what problems we suffer from and how we should solve them." I fall into the LGBT bucket and that's a different minefield, but I can sympathize. I got off topic. Nonetheless I agree that if I were to constructively criticize these often misimplemented diversity initiatives, it wouldn't be well received. Meanwhile I'll let the compound interest do its thing.
  - manfredo 8y ago
    It's always awkward when the Anglo-sphere tries to see parts of the world with their racial lens. To be frank it's pretty ridiculous that we consider everyone from Asia to be the same race (literally 60% of the world population that encompasses people like this [1], this [2], and this [3] under one label, all three groups would probably see themselves as distinct races). My understanding is that "Latinx" refers to people that are ethnically Mexico, Central America, and South American (and some parts of the Caribbean like Dominican Republic). Whereas "Hispanic" broadly refers to people who are from Spain's former colonies in the New World. So "Latinx" refers to race, but "Hispanic" refers to culture and encompasses people of a variety of races. The US government is at least making progress. The US census disconnected "Hispanic" from the race category starting in 2010 [4]. So now people like me can appropriately say that I am racially white but also Hispanic. 1. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chinese+people&t=canonical&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chinese+people&t=canonical&iar=ima... 2. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tajik+people&t=canonical&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tajik+people&t=canonical&iax=image... 3. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=dravidian+people&t=canonical&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images\ https://duckduckgo.com/?q=dravidian+people&t=canonical&iar=i... 4. https://www.census.gov/topics/population/hispanic-origin/about.html https://www.census.gov/topics/population/hispanic-origin/abo...

OpieCunningham 8y ago

Subconscious bias means your concern is applicable regardless of your skin color or gender. If you’re a white male, you could easily have been hired simply because of your skin color and gender and not your abilities. Effectively, your point is moot. Maybe worry less about the thoughts and feelings of who hired you and focus on doing your best work.

malvosenior 8y ago
As an under represented minority in tech, I couldn't agree more with the parent post. I never want to bring up my race because I want to be judged on the output of my skills and not be propped up because someone thinks I add diversity points to the team. Sadly I've had to bring up my genetic background recently as a pure survival mechanism because people keep telling me to my face that they don't want to hire white men so I need to let them know I'm not white so I don't get instantly filtered out. The whole situation is ridiculous as I never had any problems with my race before "diversity" became talking point #1 (as a developer, raising money is another story).
- OpieCunningham 8y ago
  I could be misunderstanding what you are stating, but it sounds like you are saying that when you were mistaken for white, and diversity practices did not exist, everything was good. But now that diversity practices exist, you need to preemptively point out that you are not white. Now that the conscious or subconscious race pre-determinant is shifting from "this person is white, ergo good" to "this is a person of color, ergo good", you are finding you benefit from clarifying that you fit the latter category, even if it appears as though you fit the former. This may be a "best of both worlds" situation for you. In any case, diversity hiring may mean that you will be excluded because you are mistaken for white - but that doesn't mean whomever you were excluded for wasn't more qualified than you.
  - malvosenior 8y ago
    I don't like it because I find the judging people based on their skin color extremely racist, yet I'm forced to support it due to the need to put food on the table. > diversity hiring may mean that you will be excluded because you are mistaken for white I consider this racism and it pains me to to have to play the game of the people committing it.

skj 8y ago

> I'd hate to work somewhere knowing I was hired because the color of my skin and not my abilities. Must be tough being a white male in tech, where people see you and don't automatically think you don't know what you're talking about. Imagine, being hired only because someone with equal qualifications missed out due to internal biases. I'd hate that too, good on you.

tomatotomato37 8y ago

I'd have to agree. I mean, lets imagine how this sounds by just swapping some words and tell me if it's still okay: >I suspect many companies wouldn't use this as it would make affirmative hiring policies more difficult. For example, recruiters at my company curate lists of names that are majority male, white, or Western (pulled from the census bureau) in order to try and determine which candidates are... can't think of a good word for here.

manfredo 8y ago
Although the population swapping test does enforce the Golden rule ("treat others as you'd like to be treated") it does fail to capture the fact that there are population-level disparities in education and other opportunities. I respect that many disagree with affirmative hiring policies, but just saying that it's be unacceptable to do the same thing to different races is a rather naive approach.

SolaceQuantum 8y ago

"For what it's worth I don't think our diversity hiring practices result in any lowered caliber of hires. Most of the affirmative hiring policies only affect resume review and technical phone interviews." As the post being responded to.

pjc50 8y ago

Because of the way subconscious prejudice works, unless you put a finger on the scale in the other direction then all the white guys are hired (in part) because of their appearance.

artificial 8y ago
What I’m gathering from this strategy is the only way to fight racism is to practice it? If you don’t mind sharing, what are the quotas your company has in place for guaranteeing outcome?
manfredo 8y ago
Well, Asians are getting hired at ~3x the rate of Whites in Bay area tech firms. So it can't just be benefitting Whites. In fact, at many Bay area companies Whites are a minority. Not that I'm trying to grind an axe here, but it is pretty much counterfactual to say that explicitly meritocratic hiring benefits Whites above all others. For what it's worth I think this question about hiring practices is welded to the the question of whether equality of opportunity vs. equality of outcome. It's really the question of "is it okay to create unequal opportunities to engineer more equal outcomes?" Questions like these have no static answer. Rather, society develops and continuously evolves a consensus about what the right answer is.
- stirfrykitty 8y ago
  Every Asian I know in IT works ridiculous hours compared to their white counterparts. Ditto Indians. Americans in general (IT can be different) want to work their 8 and bail. I also fall into this category. I have a union mentality towards work. It's also why I demand an hourly rate over a salary. If I have to work, you are paying me. Texas employers seem happy to accommodate me. My wife, who is medical, also demanded and got an hourly rate, and she's expensive.
  - tdhoot 8y ago
    This sort of reasoning by a hiring manager would be a great example of bias against white people.

haha9993 8y ago

if you think hiring is a fair meritocracy you are naive. Good looking people tend get hired more often. Get higher salaries. And getting hired is often about good your network is. And the richer you are or your parents are, the likelier you are to get an internship or a coveted job because you are around the "right" people. And there is also Cronyism, which I have realized is more prevalent that I thought as my career has advanced.

malvosenior 8y ago
And now we can add yet another mechanism that destroys meritocracy by being openly prejudiced against people based on their skin color and gender. Only the old forms of advantage still exist. The rich white men are still getting jobs based on their networks, but now poor and middle class white men are rejected purely based on who they are, not what they've done.
- yongjik 8y ago
  Well, on the brighter side, when a poor/middle-class white guy gets hired, they no longer have to suffer the soul-crushing agony of "Did I get hired because of my skin color? What will my coworkers think of me?" What is good for the goose...
- haha9993 8y ago
  how do you suggest we even out the playing field after 100s of years of institutionalized racism? institutionalized racism affects generation after generation. but somehow you want to tell those affected, "everything is fair now, move along"
  - malvosenior 8y ago
    As one of those affected (see my other comments on this thread), I want to be judged on the output of my work and not on my skin color.
    - haha9993 8y ago

Kluny 8y ago

As a woman with a physical disability, idgaf, I just want a job. I'm quite confident in my own abilities and require no external validation.

CyberDildonics 8y ago
As a more feminine woman with a greater disability, I feel the opposite way.

rchaud 8y ago

For any competitive position, you will have candidates with little to nothing separating them. Interviews are not standardized tests where there are easily measurable quantitative differences. Would you "hate to work" at a place if you found out you were hired because they thought "you were a good culture fit", rather than your actual abilities?