7 ms·

Just hire based on skill / experience and don't not hire someone because they are a minority. Basic fair hiring goes a long way. If you want more diverse cand

by ipaddr 6y ago

Just hire based on skill / experience and don't not hire someone because they are a minority. Basic fair hiring goes a long way. If you want more diverse candidates advertise in more diverse places. To go through some cringe-inducing ordeal is not helpful. People want to be judged based on their skills not skin / gender.

kvetching 6y ago
You clearly don't understand Equity.
WesolyKubeczek 6y ago
Oh, I think initial guidelines had that. And then it was all tramped on by some insane incentive like a bonus being dependent on how many "diverse" people a particular person actually gets to hire. Or a stack ranking based on the same. All it takes is just one perverse component in the mix.
- malandrew 6y ago
  > it was all tramped on by some insane incentive like a bonus being dependent on how many "diverse" people a particular person actually gets to hire my company has done this and while it's not illegal to provide the incentives, I don't understand how they can expect it not to result in illegal hiring behavior (discrimination based on protected class) by those optimizing for those incentives.
  - teddyh 6y ago
    > I don't understand how they can expect it not to result in illegal hiring behavior Of course they expect it to result in illegal hiring behavior. They just also expect to always get away with it, because some technically illegal things are nonetheless tolerated by society.
conception 6y ago
How does that overcome systemic bias, eg prevalent poverty in many minority groups. The poor don’t have resources, wealth or contacts, to become a super coder/manager/whatever so they don’t make it into your applicant pool based on skill alone in the first place. The cycle continues. Breaking the cycle is hard. You could target low income children but that leaves everyone looking for jobs today in the cold, etc etc. It’s a tough nut to crack but trying to fix historical bias isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
- ipaddr 6y ago
  You need to fix that at the education level. Offering free top notch education can go a long way.
  - conception 6y ago
    I agree but that ignores people trying to make it today and doesn’t create any “heroes” or mentors for those in education today.
  - bobthepanda 6y ago
    Usually, you need to start super super early. Achievement gaps show up pretty early and only get wider. And I don’t think most companies have the stomach for broad-based improvements to education starting all the way from elementary school or even preschool, particularly when the payoff is going to be when the first wave of kids in preschool make it out of at least undergrad. Of course, the superlocal, balkanized property tax system used to fund schools really doesn’t help things.
  - malandrew 6y ago
    > Offering free top notch education can go a long way I find it strange that people think you can just magically provide a top notch school and things magically correct themselves. How can you completely discount the impact of the parents involvement with their children's educational life? Paraphasing JFK, "Ask not what your school can do for your kid's education, but what you can do for your kid's education". Parents play a huge part in imparting good values in their children and also holding their children accountable for their performance in school. Furthermore, when some kids do poorly that rubs off on all the other kids by lowering the bar and setting bad examples. The parents set bad examples for their kids and then those kids set bad examples for other kids. It's turtles all the way down. "If you want to see the poor remain poor, generation after generation, just keep the standards low in their schools and make excuses for their academic shortcomings and personal misbehavior. But please don't congratulate yourself on your compassion." – Thomas Sowell
bena 6y ago
Ideally, yes. But the problem is that our implicit biases affect how we view potential candidates. Certain groups need the chance to prove themselves. If certain groups aren't fairly represented, then it does pay to prefer to hire from those groups when everything else is roughly equal. I do find it hard to believe that "the best" candidate is more often than not a straight white man.
- betwixthewires 6y ago
  > I do find it hard to believe that "the best" candidate is more often than not a straight white man. So do I, which is why I find this diversity hire exercise entirely pointless.
UShouldBWorking 6y ago
But then mit would be only male asians and every it department would follow suit. There would be not female programmers at all.
johnfn 6y ago
I think the point is that IBM believed they were hiring based purely on skill and experience. Then they realized they weren't hiring any native americans. And they figured that the best way to address that would be to hire some.

by ipaddr 6y ago

kvetching 6y ago

You clearly don't understand Equity.

WesolyKubeczek 6y ago

Oh, I think initial guidelines had that. And then it was all tramped on by some insane incentive like a bonus being dependent on how many "diverse" people a particular person actually gets to hire. Or a stack ranking based on the same. All it takes is just one perverse component in the mix.

malandrew 6y ago
> it was all tramped on by some insane incentive like a bonus being dependent on how many "diverse" people a particular person actually gets to hire my company has done this and while it's not illegal to provide the incentives, I don't understand how they can expect it not to result in illegal hiring behavior (discrimination based on protected class) by those optimizing for those incentives.
- teddyh 6y ago
  > I don't understand how they can expect it not to result in illegal hiring behavior Of course they expect it to result in illegal hiring behavior. They just also expect to always get away with it, because some technically illegal things are nonetheless tolerated by society.

conception 6y ago

How does that overcome systemic bias, eg prevalent poverty in many minority groups. The poor don’t have resources, wealth or contacts, to become a super coder/manager/whatever so they don’t make it into your applicant pool based on skill alone in the first place. The cycle continues. Breaking the cycle is hard. You could target low income children but that leaves everyone looking for jobs today in the cold, etc etc. It’s a tough nut to crack but trying to fix historical bias isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

ipaddr 6y ago
You need to fix that at the education level. Offering free top notch education can go a long way.
- conception 6y ago
  I agree but that ignores people trying to make it today and doesn’t create any “heroes” or mentors for those in education today.
- bobthepanda 6y ago
  Usually, you need to start super super early. Achievement gaps show up pretty early and only get wider. And I don’t think most companies have the stomach for broad-based improvements to education starting all the way from elementary school or even preschool, particularly when the payoff is going to be when the first wave of kids in preschool make it out of at least undergrad. Of course, the superlocal, balkanized property tax system used to fund schools really doesn’t help things.
- malandrew 6y ago
  > Offering free top notch education can go a long way I find it strange that people think you can just magically provide a top notch school and things magically correct themselves. How can you completely discount the impact of the parents involvement with their children's educational life? Paraphasing JFK, "Ask not what your school can do for your kid's education, but what you can do for your kid's education". Parents play a huge part in imparting good values in their children and also holding their children accountable for their performance in school. Furthermore, when some kids do poorly that rubs off on all the other kids by lowering the bar and setting bad examples. The parents set bad examples for their kids and then those kids set bad examples for other kids. It's turtles all the way down. "If you want to see the poor remain poor, generation after generation, just keep the standards low in their schools and make excuses for their academic shortcomings and personal misbehavior. But please don't congratulate yourself on your compassion." – Thomas Sowell

bena 6y ago

Ideally, yes. But the problem is that our implicit biases affect how we view potential candidates. Certain groups need the chance to prove themselves. If certain groups aren't fairly represented, then it does pay to prefer to hire from those groups when everything else is roughly equal. I do find it hard to believe that "the best" candidate is more often than not a straight white man.

betwixthewires 6y ago
> I do find it hard to believe that "the best" candidate is more often than not a straight white man. So do I, which is why I find this diversity hire exercise entirely pointless.

UShouldBWorking 6y ago

But then mit would be only male asians and every it department would follow suit. There would be not female programmers at all.

johnfn 6y ago

I think the point is that IBM believed they were hiring based purely on skill and experience. Then they realized they weren't hiring any native americans. And they figured that the best way to address that would be to hire some.