3 ms·

Hiring on merit can increase representation of underrepresented groups. There are also shitloads of decisions one can make that increase representation of under

Hiring on merit can increase representation of underrepresented groups. There are also shitloads of decisions one can make that increase representation of underrepresented groups without violating Title 7. You can have better parental leave and part-time work policies. Or you can open an office in a region with different racial demographics. Or you can send recruiters to events like Grace Hopper. The idea that leadership saying "we want to increase representation of underrepresented groups" converts to people illegally hiring worse candidates because of their demographics is... odd.

anonfordays 1y ago
[flagged]
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  For years? I have seen this in a very small number of places and never with the idea that actual merit is racist but instead that systems that promote a shallow understanding of individual meritocracy can perpetuate inequality. But this has nothing to do with the fact that the alternative to "meritocracy" in the corporate world is not a sort of affirmative anti-racism but is instead the old-boys club system. Moving from that system to one focused on individual merit will produce greater representation for underrepresented groups. O'Keefe is a remarkable person to cite here, given his history. There are cases of corporations violating Title 7. Duh. They violate it by discriminating against black people or women too. But if you want to claim that when people working at corporations hear about goals to increase representation that they just decide to violate Title 7 at scale, you've got some splaining to do.
  - anonfordays 1y ago
    >For years? Over a decade: https://readwrite.com/github-meritocracy-rug/#awesm=~ozpAMM1TJ63RND https://readwrite.com/github-meritocracy-rug/#awesm=~ozpAMM1... and https://www.wired.com/story/github-tech-values/ https://www.wired.com/story/github-tech-values/ >I have seen this in a very small number of places... GitHub is not a small place. >O'Keefe is a remarkable person to cite here, given his history. Remarkable because he hasn't been debunked, and IBM's attempts to have the lawsuit thrown out of court have failed. IBM has also tried to scrub the video from YouTube it seems, the Twitter link is the only one I could find. >But if you want to claim that when people working at corporations hear about goals to increase representation that they just decide to violate Title 7 at scale, you've got some splaining to do. The various lawsuits, some that have gone to the Supreme Court, have shown this type of discrimination against Whites, Asians, and males has been occurring at scale.
- userbinator 1y ago
  In the tech industry, hiring on merit tends to increase representation of Asians.
  - anonfordays 1y ago
    You'd think those who disagreed would do more than flag and move on. My original flagged post: >Hiring on merit can increase representation of underrepresented groups. I got whiplash reading this. We were told for years by leftists that meritocracy was inherently White supremacist and racist. >The idea that leadership saying "we want to increase representation of underrepresented groups" converts to people illegally hiring worse candidates because of their demographics is... odd. It's not "odd," it's exactly what happened: https://x.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1734374423124176944 https://x.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1734374423124176944 There's some strange gaslighting/narrative shaping going on in this thread.
int_19h 1y ago
The manager at the bottom who has no-one to pass that bucket to does not have the power to institute "better parental leave and part-time work policies", or "open an office in a region with different racial demographics". Yet they are still held accountable for those commitments. So what they are going to do is the only thing that they actually have the power to do, which is to favor candidates that, if hired, will check off the right boxes as far as "team diversity" goes on their upcoming mid-year review.

anonfordays 1y ago

[flagged]

UncleMeat 1y ago
For years? I have seen this in a very small number of places and never with the idea that actual merit is racist but instead that systems that promote a shallow understanding of individual meritocracy can perpetuate inequality. But this has nothing to do with the fact that the alternative to "meritocracy" in the corporate world is not a sort of affirmative anti-racism but is instead the old-boys club system. Moving from that system to one focused on individual merit will produce greater representation for underrepresented groups. O'Keefe is a remarkable person to cite here, given his history. There are cases of corporations violating Title 7. Duh. They violate it by discriminating against black people or women too. But if you want to claim that when people working at corporations hear about goals to increase representation that they just decide to violate Title 7 at scale, you've got some splaining to do.
- anonfordays 1y ago
  >For years? Over a decade: https://readwrite.com/github-meritocracy-rug/#awesm=~ozpAMM1TJ63RND https://readwrite.com/github-meritocracy-rug/#awesm=~ozpAMM1... and https://www.wired.com/story/github-tech-values/ https://www.wired.com/story/github-tech-values/ >I have seen this in a very small number of places... GitHub is not a small place. >O'Keefe is a remarkable person to cite here, given his history. Remarkable because he hasn't been debunked, and IBM's attempts to have the lawsuit thrown out of court have failed. IBM has also tried to scrub the video from YouTube it seems, the Twitter link is the only one I could find. >But if you want to claim that when people working at corporations hear about goals to increase representation that they just decide to violate Title 7 at scale, you've got some splaining to do. The various lawsuits, some that have gone to the Supreme Court, have shown this type of discrimination against Whites, Asians, and males has been occurring at scale.
userbinator 1y ago
In the tech industry, hiring on merit tends to increase representation of Asians.
- anonfordays 1y ago
  You'd think those who disagreed would do more than flag and move on. My original flagged post: >Hiring on merit can increase representation of underrepresented groups. I got whiplash reading this. We were told for years by leftists that meritocracy was inherently White supremacist and racist. >The idea that leadership saying "we want to increase representation of underrepresented groups" converts to people illegally hiring worse candidates because of their demographics is... odd. It's not "odd," it's exactly what happened: https://x.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1734374423124176944 https://x.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1734374423124176944 There's some strange gaslighting/narrative shaping going on in this thread.

int_19h 1y ago

The manager at the bottom who has no-one to pass that bucket to does not have the power to institute "better parental leave and part-time work policies", or "open an office in a region with different racial demographics". Yet they are still held accountable for those commitments. So what they are going to do is the only thing that they actually have the power to do, which is to favor candidates that, if hired, will check off the right boxes as far as "team diversity" goes on their upcoming mid-year review.