5 ms·

From the article: "a business that offers feminist-minded co-working spaces". How should I imagine a feminist minded co-working space?

by kabes 7y ago

Havoc 7y ago
The kind of place where you get roasted for daring to hold open a door for someone because it implies they're incapable of opening doors independently.
- williamdclt 7y ago
  This is mockery and very uncalled for, this isn't said or implied anywhere.
  - codingmess 7y ago
    It is implied by "feminist minded".
101404 7y ago
Remember when Google did a company-wide study to find out for how much women at Google were underpaid? And it turned out that women in the same job were actually earning much more than their male colleagues doing the same thing. Now imagine "open salaries" making it obvious that the "women underpaid" is just a lie. An entire industry of "feminism" would die. Maybe NYT should not push too hard for this "openess".
- vilts 7y ago
  Do you have reference to that Google study? I'd really like to read it.
  - dnissley 7y ago
    https://www.blog.google/inside-google/company-announcements/ensuring-we-pay-fairly-and-equitably/ https://www.blog.google/inside-google/company-announcements/...
    - e12e 7y ago
      Thanks, if that's what was referenced above, it certainly isn't a study to see if women were underpaid - but to see if anyone was underpaid. And reading the brief content: > There are a couple of reasons that the pay equity analysis required more adjustments in 2018, compared to 2017. First, the 2018 analysis flagged one particularly large job code (Level 4 Software Engineer) for adjustments. Within this job code, men were flagged for adjustments because they received less discretionary funds than women. Secondly, this year we undertook a new hire analysis to look for any discrepancies in offers to new employees—this accounted for 49 percent of the total dollars spent on adjustments. I suppose a natural question would be if an overpaid se4 is an underpromoted se5, or if an underpaid se4 is an overpromoted sr3. I understand the try to correct for "similar roles" - but that doesn't mean the promtion/roles are accurate. Either way; interesting link.
- xhkkffbf 7y ago
  Is Susan Dominus going to reveal how much she was paid to write the piece? I doubt it. She's probably one of the better paid people there and it would just generate animosity with the younger feminists.
- thebean11 7y ago
  Extrapolating from "women at Google aren't underpaid" to "women aren't underpaid" is a huge leap. Big tech competes heavily for women engineers because they are so scarce, which is not the case in every industry.
  - 101404 7y ago
    I wasn't extrapolating from "women at Google aren't underpaid". I was extrapolating from "men at Google are underpaid while the official narrative pushed to make all believe that women were". What industry do you have in mind?
- joshuamorton 7y ago
  > earning much more than their male less than 1% is not "much more". Please don't editorialize. Especially when the data I have (and I have more than most!) on Google's internal salaries shows that women do appear to be underpaid by some measures.
  - 101404 7y ago
    What are those "some measures" and where is the 1% coming from?
    - joshuamorton 7y ago
      "We provided $9.7 million in adjustments to a total of 10,677 Googlers." -> just under $1000 per adjustment, on average. Note that since the comment here is that the affect group (L4 men) was large and led to the majority of the changes, we can generally discount ideas like "oh there were a small number of massive adjustments and a large number of tiny ones", or we can believe that's the case, but then the L4 men adjustments would be smaller on average, not larger. The average L4 SWE at Google is taking home more than $200K annually, and has a salary well over 100K, so these changes amounted to less than half a percent of total comp, and less than one percent of salary. As for "some measures", the short answer is that when you control for performance rating and level, as Google did here, things generally look reasonable. The problem is that there are good reasons to believe that historically equally performing women were less likely to be promoted (for various structural reasons that I won't get into, weren't malicious, and have been at least somewhat addressed). The result then is that high performing women may still be under-leveled or under-compensated in relation to their actual performance. So a completely reasonable interpretation of this sequence of events is that women were as a group, somewhat under-leveled. Their managers, individually, noticed this and did (as Google leadership suggests) what they could to use manager-discretionary compensation to address this underpayment. Again, individually and stochastically. The overall analysis notices this, and because one stochastic process (promotion) previously had a bias against women, and because the recent analysis didn't control for that, I get an extra $1K. Which is nice, but it's not anything particularly special.
williamdclt 7y ago
I assume it's a matter of community. It's not any more weird than a jewish community, black community or vegan community.
- barry-cotter 7y ago
  Indeed, no weirder than a white community or a Christian community.
codingmess 7y ago
Like a horrible place full of loathing and self-pity.
- dang 7y ago
  Please don't take HN threads further into ideological warfare. You did that repeatedly here. We're trying for a different sort of discussion, so please don't. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: since we asked you this a few weeks ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22124920 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22124920) and you haven't fixed it, we've banned your account until we get some reason to believe that you want to use HN as intended. If you do want to, please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and let us know at hn@ycombinator.com
alteria 7y ago
I've been to the Riveter several times, and at a basic level, their slogan of "built by women for everyone" is a fairly good way to describe it, but it's just like any other coworking space. People come in, work, hang out, and leave. They do try to build community that emphasizes supporting entrepreneurs who are women, but not exclusively.

From the article: "a business that offers feminist-minded co-working spaces". How should I imagine a feminist minded co-working space?

by kabes 7y ago

From the article: "a business that offers feminist-minded co-working spaces". How should I imagine a feminist minded co-working space?

Havoc 7y ago

The kind of place where you get roasted for daring to hold open a door for someone because it implies they're incapable of opening doors independently.

williamdclt 7y ago
This is mockery and very uncalled for, this isn't said or implied anywhere.
- codingmess 7y ago
  It is implied by "feminist minded".

101404 7y ago

Remember when Google did a company-wide study to find out for how much women at Google were underpaid? And it turned out that women in the same job were actually earning much more than their male colleagues doing the same thing. Now imagine "open salaries" making it obvious that the "women underpaid" is just a lie. An entire industry of "feminism" would die. Maybe NYT should not push too hard for this "openess".

vilts 7y ago
Do you have reference to that Google study? I'd really like to read it.
- dnissley 7y ago
  https://www.blog.google/inside-google/company-announcements/ensuring-we-pay-fairly-and-equitably/ https://www.blog.google/inside-google/company-announcements/...
  - e12e 7y ago
    Thanks, if that's what was referenced above, it certainly isn't a study to see if women were underpaid - but to see if anyone was underpaid. And reading the brief content: > There are a couple of reasons that the pay equity analysis required more adjustments in 2018, compared to 2017. First, the 2018 analysis flagged one particularly large job code (Level 4 Software Engineer) for adjustments. Within this job code, men were flagged for adjustments because they received less discretionary funds than women. Secondly, this year we undertook a new hire analysis to look for any discrepancies in offers to new employees—this accounted for 49 percent of the total dollars spent on adjustments. I suppose a natural question would be if an overpaid se4 is an underpromoted se5, or if an underpaid se4 is an overpromoted sr3. I understand the try to correct for "similar roles" - but that doesn't mean the promtion/roles are accurate. Either way; interesting link.
xhkkffbf 7y ago
Is Susan Dominus going to reveal how much she was paid to write the piece? I doubt it. She's probably one of the better paid people there and it would just generate animosity with the younger feminists.
thebean11 7y ago
Extrapolating from "women at Google aren't underpaid" to "women aren't underpaid" is a huge leap. Big tech competes heavily for women engineers because they are so scarce, which is not the case in every industry.
- 101404 7y ago
  I wasn't extrapolating from "women at Google aren't underpaid". I was extrapolating from "men at Google are underpaid while the official narrative pushed to make all believe that women were". What industry do you have in mind?
joshuamorton 7y ago
> earning much more than their male less than 1% is not "much more". Please don't editorialize. Especially when the data I have (and I have more than most!) on Google's internal salaries shows that women do appear to be underpaid by some measures.
- 101404 7y ago
  What are those "some measures" and where is the 1% coming from?
  - joshuamorton 7y ago
    "We provided $9.7 million in adjustments to a total of 10,677 Googlers." -> just under $1000 per adjustment, on average. Note that since the comment here is that the affect group (L4 men) was large and led to the majority of the changes, we can generally discount ideas like "oh there were a small number of massive adjustments and a large number of tiny ones", or we can believe that's the case, but then the L4 men adjustments would be smaller on average, not larger. The average L4 SWE at Google is taking home more than $200K annually, and has a salary well over 100K, so these changes amounted to less than half a percent of total comp, and less than one percent of salary. As for "some measures", the short answer is that when you control for performance rating and level, as Google did here, things generally look reasonable. The problem is that there are good reasons to believe that historically equally performing women were less likely to be promoted (for various structural reasons that I won't get into, weren't malicious, and have been at least somewhat addressed). The result then is that high performing women may still be under-leveled or under-compensated in relation to their actual performance. So a completely reasonable interpretation of this sequence of events is that women were as a group, somewhat under-leveled. Their managers, individually, noticed this and did (as Google leadership suggests) what they could to use manager-discretionary compensation to address this underpayment. Again, individually and stochastically. The overall analysis notices this, and because one stochastic process (promotion) previously had a bias against women, and because the recent analysis didn't control for that, I get an extra $1K. Which is nice, but it's not anything particularly special.

williamdclt 7y ago

I assume it's a matter of community. It's not any more weird than a jewish community, black community or vegan community.

barry-cotter 7y ago
Indeed, no weirder than a white community or a Christian community.

codingmess 7y ago

Like a horrible place full of loathing and self-pity.

dang 7y ago
Please don't take HN threads further into ideological warfare. You did that repeatedly here. We're trying for a different sort of discussion, so please don't. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: since we asked you this a few weeks ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22124920 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22124920) and you haven't fixed it, we've banned your account until we get some reason to believe that you want to use HN as intended. If you do want to, please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and let us know at hn@ycombinator.com

alteria 7y ago

I've been to the Riveter several times, and at a basic level, their slogan of "built by women for everyone" is a fairly good way to describe it, but it's just like any other coworking space. People come in, work, hang out, and leave. They do try to build community that emphasizes supporting entrepreneurs who are women, but not exclusively.