40% of new hires are hispanic. Funnily enough, hispanic is counted as a race even though one can easily be hispanic AND white. And the fact that black and "othe

40% of new hires are hispanic. Funnily enough, hispanic is counted as a race even though one can easily be hispanic AND white. And the fact that black and "other race" are both options makes me assume that many of these hispanics might be considered white (at least on a census). There's nothing stopping a white hispanic person from seeing the social pendulum swing and switching their self-reported "race" on their job application. Additionally, it looks like about a 50% of growth came from "less-senior jobs" This sector lost 19k white americans, while gaining 176k poc. With 60% of that sector's growth coming from hispanics. This sector houses "Sales, laborers, service workers and others." The higher sections that house "roles that typically require degrees" show different hiring patterns. With white americans making gains (that I believe are still disproportionatly low to their share of degree holders? Idk, someone else can do the math), and Asians making the most gains among managers and professionals. I wish Bloomberg had mentioned how many people are actually employed at S&P 100 companies, I bet <150k professional+ highers is a drop in the bucket compared to their workforce. Bloomberg also makes note that this trend may not have held past 2021 due to DEI being disincentived politically. The article displays and explains its data well, though I wish they would have brought up the fact that Hispanics can totally be white. And given the title and the standfirst I expect this to start a lot of angry discussions online. Personally, I'd guess that a lot of the growth simply came from white hispanics and America's rapidly growing, highly educated asian population.