7 ms·
> Of 323,092 new jobs added in 2021 by S&P 100 companies, 302,570 (94%) went to people of color Given this July 2024 population estimate by race from census.go
by miles 2y ago
> Of 323,092 new jobs added in 2021 by S&P 100 companies, 302,570 (94%) went to people of color
Given this July 2024 population estimate by race from census.gov[1], leaving only 6% of new jobs to the majority seems tailor-made to trigger a large-scale backlash:
75.3% White alone
13.7% Black alone
1.3% American Indian and Alaska Native alone
6.4% Asian alone
0.3% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone
3.1% Two or More Races
19.5% Hispanic or Latino
58.4% White alone, not Hispanic or Latino
[1] https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045224 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045224
- grahamj 2y ago[flagged]
- programjames 2y agoHow are the people without the jobs doing the tilting?
- grahamj 2y agoThey aren't, but it's unfair from them to benefit from the tilt.
- programjames 2y agoWho is benefiting from the tilt? Are they the same people getting thumbed in your proposed solution? EDIT, I'd also like to add: Why do you believe this tilt exists? I find it plausible to exist (especially because lots of people seem to make a lot of money talking about it), but where is the evidence for it? What I'm asking for isn't evidence that one group of people are doing better than another, I'm asking for evidence that a group of people are being discriminated against. E.g., if you took the exact same person and switched out their profile photo to showcase a Hispanic woman instead of an Asian man, they would end up with far fewer job offers. The thing is, people have tried doing exactly this, and every time it goes the other way! The exact same application, minus a name and photo change, has the reverse effect from what you would expect if the basis behind DEI initiatives was true.
- dsajames 2y agoThis isn't pressing your thumb. This is throwing away half the scale
- ChocolateGod 2y agoWhy is skin colour or ethnicity when it comes to employment even relevent?
- grahamj 2y ago[flagged]
- ChocolateGod 2y ago> counteract systemic bias What is the bias and causes it? Because I don't think it's a systemic bias in the hiring system, so why not solve the problem rather than trying to patch the effect.
- ConspiracyFact 2y ago[flagged]
- Izkata 2y ago> tbf this should all start at the education level so that black/hispanic/indigenous girls/gays/whatevers aren't joining CS classes, looking around and thinking they don't belong there I never thought that. That part of me was irrelevant to the degree, and I found it great that no one cared and were able to focus on the degree. Forcing diversity topics in and making them a focus instead would have been hell.
- bolognafairy 2y ago[flagged]
- ChocolateGod 2y agoStop doing what? DEI? I'm not sure of your point.
- inemesitaffia 2y ago[flagged]
- CyberDildonics 2y agoNo matter what people think the right thing to do is, making any hiring decision on the basis of a protected group is illegal in the US, no matter who is on what side of the equation.
- jrockway 2y agoPeople aren't making hiring decisions based on protected classes. Rather, they're looking for qualified candidates in new areas. One thing that's common is for people to recommend their friends for jobs. Most of the time, their friends look just like them, because that's the kind of friends that people make. If you base your hiring process around this easy source of candidates, you end up not talking to a lot of people that would be qualified for the position. "DEI" can be as simple as "in addition to employee referrals, we're going to hand out brochures at a career fair".
- grahamj 2y ago[flagged]
- DaSHacka 2y agoThey actually have been recently; Especially in academia where after racial-based Affirmative Action was ruled unconstitutional, wealth-based AA has been helping economically disadvantaged individuals—even including white men. https://journalistsresource.org/education/race-neutral-alternatives-affirmative-action-college-diversity/ https://journalistsresource.org/education/race-neutral-alter...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- foota 2y agoI don't want to make too many assumptions here because it's a bit of a minefield, but... perhaps there's an entirely selfish and rational explanation for DEI hiring programs in a tight labor market? If you feel like you've hired all of the labor you can at a given market price (e.g., you're cheap and don't want to pay people more) it might make sense to try and reach out to parts of the labor force that you feel have been underutilized (or historically underrepresented, but we're looking at this from the perspective of a ruthless business), and DEI programs could be a way of achieving this. I don't think that's an entirely accurate narrative, but I do think it's probably at least part of this (e.g., that all of the best white people were already hired, while many POC people of equal caliber were not or not making as much). The job market was soaring in 2021 and looking for ways to hire new people without having to pay them more would likely be highly attractive. Now that the job market is not so competitive, there's not as much need to do so if you're just trying to find workers.
- nearbuy 2y agoI suspect the conditions were the opposite at the time: competition for good non-white employees was fierce after BLM, making them harder to find. If I'm understanding the Bloomberg numbers correctly, a random non-white person would have 47x better odds of being hired than a white person at the S&P 100 companies. Edit: another comment on hn says that Bloomberg's methodology was flawed, which seems more plausible to me.
- stevage 2y agoI had an interesting experience asking a startup I worked at why they had no female engineers. The answer was they couldn't afford them. They were in such demand that they commanded a significant premium over male engineers at the same level.
- skeeter2020 2y ago[flagged]
- 2y ago
- droptablemain 2y agoWe are already in the backlash.
- whimsicalism 2y agothis is an incredibly misleading statistic skewed by the fact that almost all retiring corporate workers are white so lots of white jobs were “lost”