2 ms·

> If I were a white man with the same experience, I might not even be here? I get this... but is the contrary worse? you've very possibly missed out on jobs a

> If I were a white man with the same experience, I might not even be here? I get this... but is the contrary worse? you've very possibly missed out on jobs at the expense of a less qualified white person. There's some evidence that even having a "black sounding name" results in resumes being looked over. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-29/job-applicants-with-black-names-still-less-likely-to-get-the-interview#xj4y7vzkg https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-29/job-appli... Inclusivity initiatives can be problematic, but prior to their existence a lot of the time it was "continue not even being fully aware that you only hire white people"

joemazerino 4y ago
Applying real world hard from theoretical data is exactly why DIE should die. It is absolutely absurd to assume that data supporting racism (ie: black people can't get jobs because they are somehow handicapped) is more applicable than data showing equality of opportunity. Play this logic game: besides racism, why do you think these resumes are passed over?
- micromacrofoot 4y ago
  It's not really a "logic game"... that seems like a dismissive way to approach this conversation and makes me feel like you may not be willing to entertain any ideas through the course of a discussion. There have been multiple experiments run using resumes with identical experience but different names, and it seems that "black sounding" names are consistently called back less often, in some cases 50% less. https://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/employers-replies-racial-names https://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/employers-replies-racial-n... This makes me feel like some kind of hard requirement like a quota might actually be corrective given that there are measurable biases in who gets called back for an interview? Or maybe to put it in a different lens, given this is a narrow scope of data that doesn't do much to support the vague idea of a "diversity initiative" — perhaps the better approach would be anonymizing resumes during the initial outreach process?

joemazerino 4y ago

Applying real world hard from theoretical data is exactly why DIE should die. It is absolutely absurd to assume that data supporting racism (ie: black people can't get jobs because they are somehow handicapped) is more applicable than data showing equality of opportunity. Play this logic game: besides racism, why do you think these resumes are passed over?

micromacrofoot 4y ago
It's not really a "logic game"... that seems like a dismissive way to approach this conversation and makes me feel like you may not be willing to entertain any ideas through the course of a discussion. There have been multiple experiments run using resumes with identical experience but different names, and it seems that "black sounding" names are consistently called back less often, in some cases 50% less. https://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/employers-replies-racial-names https://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/employers-replies-racial-n... This makes me feel like some kind of hard requirement like a quota might actually be corrective given that there are measurable biases in who gets called back for an interview? Or maybe to put it in a different lens, given this is a narrow scope of data that doesn't do much to support the vague idea of a "diversity initiative" — perhaps the better approach would be anonymizing resumes during the initial outreach process?