Personally I'd much prefer to apply to a job promoting a "fair hiring" vs "equitable". >We finished our last hiring a few months ago. I'm proud of the way we h

Personally I'd much prefer to apply to a job promoting a "fair hiring" vs "equitable". >We finished our last hiring a few months ago. I'm proud of the way we handled the process, and I think it resulted in the best hire possible for the position. This seems to be conflicting with the goal of being equitable. > I was surprised by the results. Long-time software freedom activists, whose work we know and respect, wound up not making it to our final group, whereas our final applicants included people who were new to software freedom, had never been in a communications role or who we simply hadn't met before. So they "unbiased" out the people with lots of relevant experience. > Because of this, we decided to pay each our five finalists $500 to proceed with the rest of the interview. Why 5, why not 10? This hardly seems equitable. > one of the final three candidates that they were not really interested the role we were hiring for They got $500 though, don't you think this is what you should screen folks out early for? > Conducting final interviews This step looked like a more traditional interview Ahh, so they used an "equitable" screening process and a traditional hiring interview.