5 ms·

enforced top-down from leaders and decision makers by the "commitment to diversity" and hiring of unqualified people based on diversity representation, not meri

by slt2021 2y ago

enforced top-down from leaders and decision makers by the "commitment to diversity" and hiring of unqualified people based on diversity representation, not merit. the most recent example is Kamala Harris: she had the worst primary performance during 2020, but still was selected as VP by Biden and was nominated without primaries again in 2024. Her electoral results speak for DEI in general, when hiring decision is done by picking the most diverse candidate based on skin-level shallow criteria instead of fair competition (primaries)

pavlov 2y ago
We’re talking about corporations, not political parties. If this enforcement to hire unqualified people is happening, surely there’s lots of evidence? Internal emails and messages regularly get released as part of lawsuits. There must be lots of cases where middle managers at Apple are complaining that they’re being forced to hire an unqualified person because of a top-down edict, as you say.
- slt2021 2y ago
  just look at the LA FD: what are the chances that 3 top leaders in FD are lesbian women? Given the fact that the rest of the fire dept are white males, the chances of this happening at random are minuscule. This is the proof that people who have DEI factors are promoted to the top leadership, with the predictable poor outcomes
  - defrost 2y ago
    > with the predictable poor outcomes Why predictable? Are lesbians incapable of being organised, unable to rebuild V8 engines, can't hold a hose because of its shape? Have you met a significant number of lesbians?
    - slt2021 2y ago
      I have eyes, I can read news, and I can see the results of their work in LA.
      - defrost 2y ago
        But you can't explain why its predictable that lesbians --> failure.
        slt2021 2y ago
        it is predictable because they are hired and promoted because of their sexual identity and gender (which has no connection to job duties), not merit. The moment you start hiring based on identity, instead of merit is when things will go south
        lupusreal 2y ago
        Exactly. If the special non-merit criteria were instead "likes trains" or "has a monobrow" it would have the same effect. Not because those traits are negatively correlated with being good at the job, but simply because those traits are unaligned with the job, so statistically its unlikely for the best candidate to just coincidentally happen to also have those special traits.
        zo1 2y ago
        Not OP, but that point has nothing to do with them being lesbians or females. That label distracts from the actual criticism and bias that sadly played a part. It could just as well have been "obese native americans with amputations" or "foreign born white dudes with Crohn's disease" or "pansexual blue-haired dance majors" or "three sons of Mayor Dalton that approves the fire department's budget". If that property ticks the boxes, and they occur here at a way-higher proportion than the overall population then bingo - you know you've had bias and reverse discrimination for the sake of representation, rather than merit alone. The alternative is just a really really unlikely coincidence.
        pavlov 2y ago
- frowaway4anoday 2y ago
  Some of us like our jobs too much to risk leaking these things from resourceful companies that can ruin away our lives in an instant. Might be going too far to say “unqualified”, but I have already seen “less qualified” changed to “meets the minimum requirements” specifically changed to push through some hires. I am not taking a stance, the hired still worked great, but decisions were made, calls were exchanged, interview notes were modified, and I don't think you can defend this position honestly as of ~2020 Spring. There was a good 3 years where it was not about getting “the best”, but specifically for asking us to lower out bars to “get enough”, and letting HR take it from there.
  - pavlov 2y ago
    Was your previous hiring process actually getting you “the best”? In that case you’re much better at hiring than any corporation I’ve ever seen. I was at Facebook for several years, and the hiring process was 90% noise where everyone pretended very hard that it’s signal.
    - frowaway4anoday 2y ago
      Definitely not! They let me in, after all, and I know where I’d fit in. Churn used to be high enough I believe they would expect to grind you out if you couldn’t do the work. It was very cruel. I’d say the SNR was higher than -19dB, though (assuming we are using Volts on this shocking topic). You can’t target the best if you are not open to looking for them but instead start looking for people to make them your best. I think that this fit the overall company strategy pivot from one that encouraged “personal excellence by dealing with excellent people”, to one that pushed “managerial precision through finding acceptable cogs”. Im paraphrasing the exact phrase, but I think thats a fair interpretation. These are not bad things, they are just the winds of change based on the lungs of whoever is in charge to think whats best for the company. Sometimes it sucks, sometimes it blows, sometimes it goes nowhere. The new approached allowed for different people to get lucky, different people to get ahead, and different people to start filling the hallways. Thats gotta be worth something, somewhere. People willing to try at this level deserve a chance, and it’s not my money, so why not. What changed for me was that previously they could make a claim and cloak the results in facts (maybe because I believed it), but now they were looking to that tweak the claim so that it could be one where you could cloak the facts with results (and were asking me to do my part). Part of this shift was warranted, part of it was appeasement, all if it felt like you’d just been served a bundled cable TV plan.
- doublepg23 2y ago
  The FAA has an ongoing class action lawsuit where they discriminated against qualified candidates on the basis of race using a newly implemented “biographical questionnaire” https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-a-quick-overview https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-...

pavlov 2y ago

We’re talking about corporations, not political parties. If this enforcement to hire unqualified people is happening, surely there’s lots of evidence? Internal emails and messages regularly get released as part of lawsuits. There must be lots of cases where middle managers at Apple are complaining that they’re being forced to hire an unqualified person because of a top-down edict, as you say.

slt2021 2y ago
just look at the LA FD: what are the chances that 3 top leaders in FD are lesbian women? Given the fact that the rest of the fire dept are white males, the chances of this happening at random are minuscule. This is the proof that people who have DEI factors are promoted to the top leadership, with the predictable poor outcomes
- defrost 2y ago
  > with the predictable poor outcomes Why predictable? Are lesbians incapable of being organised, unable to rebuild V8 engines, can't hold a hose because of its shape? Have you met a significant number of lesbians?
  - slt2021 2y ago
    I have eyes, I can read news, and I can see the results of their work in LA.
    - defrost 2y ago
      But you can't explain why its predictable that lesbians --> failure.
      - slt2021 2y ago
        it is predictable because they are hired and promoted because of their sexual identity and gender (which has no connection to job duties), not merit. The moment you start hiring based on identity, instead of merit is when things will go south
        lupusreal 2y ago
        Exactly. If the special non-merit criteria were instead "likes trains" or "has a monobrow" it would have the same effect. Not because those traits are negatively correlated with being good at the job, but simply because those traits are unaligned with the job, so statistically its unlikely for the best candidate to just coincidentally happen to also have those special traits.
      - zo1 2y ago
        Not OP, but that point has nothing to do with them being lesbians or females. That label distracts from the actual criticism and bias that sadly played a part. It could just as well have been "obese native americans with amputations" or "foreign born white dudes with Crohn's disease" or "pansexual blue-haired dance majors" or "three sons of Mayor Dalton that approves the fire department's budget". If that property ticks the boxes, and they occur here at a way-higher proportion than the overall population then bingo - you know you've had bias and reverse discrimination for the sake of representation, rather than merit alone. The alternative is just a really really unlikely coincidence.
        pavlov 2y ago
frowaway4anoday 2y ago
Some of us like our jobs too much to risk leaking these things from resourceful companies that can ruin away our lives in an instant. Might be going too far to say “unqualified”, but I have already seen “less qualified” changed to “meets the minimum requirements” specifically changed to push through some hires. I am not taking a stance, the hired still worked great, but decisions were made, calls were exchanged, interview notes were modified, and I don't think you can defend this position honestly as of ~2020 Spring. There was a good 3 years where it was not about getting “the best”, but specifically for asking us to lower out bars to “get enough”, and letting HR take it from there.
- pavlov 2y ago
  Was your previous hiring process actually getting you “the best”? In that case you’re much better at hiring than any corporation I’ve ever seen. I was at Facebook for several years, and the hiring process was 90% noise where everyone pretended very hard that it’s signal.
  - frowaway4anoday 2y ago
    Definitely not! They let me in, after all, and I know where I’d fit in. Churn used to be high enough I believe they would expect to grind you out if you couldn’t do the work. It was very cruel. I’d say the SNR was higher than -19dB, though (assuming we are using Volts on this shocking topic). You can’t target the best if you are not open to looking for them but instead start looking for people to make them your best. I think that this fit the overall company strategy pivot from one that encouraged “personal excellence by dealing with excellent people”, to one that pushed “managerial precision through finding acceptable cogs”. Im paraphrasing the exact phrase, but I think thats a fair interpretation. These are not bad things, they are just the winds of change based on the lungs of whoever is in charge to think whats best for the company. Sometimes it sucks, sometimes it blows, sometimes it goes nowhere. The new approached allowed for different people to get lucky, different people to get ahead, and different people to start filling the hallways. Thats gotta be worth something, somewhere. People willing to try at this level deserve a chance, and it’s not my money, so why not. What changed for me was that previously they could make a claim and cloak the results in facts (maybe because I believed it), but now they were looking to that tweak the claim so that it could be one where you could cloak the facts with results (and were asking me to do my part). Part of this shift was warranted, part of it was appeasement, all if it felt like you’d just been served a bundled cable TV plan.
doublepg23 2y ago
The FAA has an ongoing class action lawsuit where they discriminated against qualified candidates on the basis of race using a newly implemented “biographical questionnaire” https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-a-quick-overview https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-...