3 ms·

> As a result of the findings, which were first reported by the New York Times, Google provided an additional $9.7 million to 10,677 employees, the majority of

> As a result of the findings, which were first reported by the New York Times, Google provided an additional $9.7 million to 10,677 employees, the majority of whom are men, to compensate them for unexplained discrepancies between their 2018 pay and that of co-workers who have the same responsibilities.

foota 3y ago
Sop $1000 on average?
- chrisco255 3y ago
  Averages hide variance.
  - onion2k 3y ago
    The article also states "At the end of 2017, it adjusted 228 employees’ salaries by a combined total of about $270,000", which is a very similar figure. You can assume there's a wide variance, but all that would mean is that most employees are paid basically correctly with a few outliers. If anything, that would diminish the value of the story.
Certhas 3y ago
So this sounds like some men and women were earning less than others. If pay has a large variance (e.g. because some people are better at selling themselves), and the workforce is overwhelming male, you would expect exactly this. Even if women on average were to earn less, the majority of those being underpaid would be men.
- ithkuil 3y ago
  This! Our ability to talk about difficult things in a sensible way is so often thwarted by the unwillingness to just follow the simplest explanation first. As if humans were designed for preferentially seeking extraordinary explanations
- nopcode 3y ago
  This is the exact quote from the article, it clearly states that men received more relative to their size: > In response to the study, Google gave $9.7 million in additional compensation to 10,677 employees for this year. Men account for about 69 percent of the company’s work force, but they received a higher percentage of the money. The exact number of men who got raises is unclear.
polski-g 3y ago
Having the "same responsibilities" does not necessarily mean you are entitled to the same compensation. I am not why this would ever be the case. If employee A is 50% more efficient than employee B -- who both are making widget X -- why would employee B be paid the same as A?

foota 3y ago

Sop $1000 on average?

chrisco255 3y ago
Averages hide variance.
- onion2k 3y ago
  The article also states "At the end of 2017, it adjusted 228 employees’ salaries by a combined total of about $270,000", which is a very similar figure. You can assume there's a wide variance, but all that would mean is that most employees are paid basically correctly with a few outliers. If anything, that would diminish the value of the story.

Certhas 3y ago

So this sounds like some men and women were earning less than others. If pay has a large variance (e.g. because some people are better at selling themselves), and the workforce is overwhelming male, you would expect exactly this. Even if women on average were to earn less, the majority of those being underpaid would be men.

ithkuil 3y ago
This! Our ability to talk about difficult things in a sensible way is so often thwarted by the unwillingness to just follow the simplest explanation first. As if humans were designed for preferentially seeking extraordinary explanations
nopcode 3y ago
This is the exact quote from the article, it clearly states that men received more relative to their size: > In response to the study, Google gave $9.7 million in additional compensation to 10,677 employees for this year. Men account for about 69 percent of the company’s work force, but they received a higher percentage of the money. The exact number of men who got raises is unclear.

polski-g 3y ago

Having the "same responsibilities" does not necessarily mean you are entitled to the same compensation. I am not why this would ever be the case. If employee A is 50% more efficient than employee B -- who both are making widget X -- why would employee B be paid the same as A?