7 ms·
I've literally been in meetings were managers said they couldn't hire someone because they weren't a minority. (edit: also to clarify I think what the Trump ad
by winrid 1y ago
I've literally been in meetings were managers said they couldn't hire someone because they weren't a minority.
(edit: also to clarify I think what the Trump admin is doing - bribing to take a different political stance - and allowing monopolies - is bad)
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- ok_dad 1y agoI’ve been in a meeting where my boss said he didn’t want to hire any more Indians because they aren’t fun to talk to at lunch, so I guess our two stories cancel out?
- netik 1y agoTwo racists make a right (winger) I guess.
- jjtheblunt 1y ago> so I guess our two stories cancel out? and emit a photon and antineutrino? (nerd alert...). https://www.nuclear-power.com/nuclear-power/reactor-physics/atomic-nuclear-physics/fundamental-particles/what-is-antimatter/matter-antimatter-creation-and-annihilation/ https://www.nuclear-power.com/nuclear-power/reactor-physics/...
- andrewflnr 1y agoNo, just some gamma radiation and maybe pions or something.
- neverbehind 1y ago[flagged]
- jdonaldson 1y agoAre you saying that all we have to do is hire a few boring Indians to cancel out one DEI hire? This is huge news!
- 9283409232 1y agoI've been in meetings where we had minorities that killed the interviews but leadership gave us shifty reasons as to why they weren't hired. They landed on "bad cultural fit"
- pfannkuchen 1y agoWhen you say minority are these like East Asians or Indians? I’ve never heard of anyone rejecting a high performing African American or Hispanic for cultural fit, I’d be curious to hear what part of the country this happened in if it was from the latter group.
- 9283409232 1y agoThis happened about a decade ago on the west coast when I still worked for big business. The candidates I'm thinking of were Hispanic.
- nickpsecurity 1y ago[flagged]
- foogazi 1y agoI’ve worked with/for/hired by Indians & Chinese from startups, corporate to FAANG - smartest, kindest people I’ve ever worked with I don’t know or care who they invest with or if they own hotels
- nickpsecurity 1y agoThe parent said their boss didn't want to hire Indians. The seem to support DEI with that company as evidence that (white?) systematically discriminate against Indians. That power and status stay within one group those people werent allowed to join. I posted a counter-example showing Indians systematically discriminate against non-Indians and shift almost all money to Indians across an entire, industry segment. So, they're no different. Also, the intersectionality (DEI) proponents strictly focus on whites as the problem, but non-whites as the opposite, when non-whites do the same things structurally when in power and should be talked about the same way. That DEI proponents never treat non-whites as advantaged and whites as disadvantaged, even when company or industry data supports it, shows they're actually racists who are anti-white. They'll be inconsistent with their own principles to work against white people. If called on it, like that whites can't get hired in company X or no power in industry Y, they start making excuses or denying a disadvantage or they deny that they even give advantages to non-whites like in this tthread. They certainly don't follow standard DEI or intersectionality principles to support shifting jobs or power to white people from the non-white majorities like they would if white people were the majority. We noticed the double standards. Their principles are therefore lies if specific groups can never benefit from them.
- everdrive 1y agoTwo wrongs do not make a right. Both practices are wrong.
- ok_dad 1y agoI agree. No singular story like either of ours represents the hiring practices of any company except those we were part of. That was my point, but I guess subtlety doesn’t work well on the internet.
- tootie 1y agoHard disagree. On the one hand, "we have to hire a minority" is extremely blunt interpretation of DEI. But the intent is to foster diversity and that does mean hiring underrepresented groups. Having a diverse team is net positive on a lot of fronts. There are studies showing it actually improves team performance, but more generally it improves society. It may be marginally "unfair" for a particular company to be the one picking up the slack for society, but given the systemic discrimination that exists against minorities in so many part of society, giving them any sort of accommodation in hiring can at least offset the injustice elsewhere. The net result is a better society. Why is that the responsibility of a private company? Because companies are people and people live in society.
- everdrive 1y agoThe people "balancing the scales" are ideologically motivated and are prone to their own error. So, you need to reckon with whether they're doing more harm than good. And to the extent that they're doing harm, what is the solution?
- tootie 1y agoIs your argument "humans are fallible so we should give up?" The effectiveness (and sincerity) of DEI programs have certainly been mixed, but they should produce measurable outcomes that can be iterated and improved upon. A lot of the commentary in this thread and the rhetoric from the White House is that DEI is bad idea and should not be attempted because we shouldn't seek equity.
- Manuel_D 1y agoAnd one of my previous companies, Indian male applicants were categorized as "ND". Negative Diversity. Even less desirable than whites. Your stories don't cancel out, they add up: most DEI programs I've seen have discriminated against Asians at least as much as whites if not more.
- aorloff 1y agoOk great, and what ? I spent 25 years in the industry and a dozen as a manager and I can tell you that straight up racism against black and latino people has been coddled and tolerated for a long time. The solution isn't to say: we won't hire white people, but it is to say, we have to create teams that are heterogeneous (and doing what that takes). Your personal anecdotes are not what makes up racism, writ large. And the fact that this has to be explained is, you know, the thing.
- winrid 1y agoYou said that my personal anecdotes don't matter while bringing up your personal anecdotes. I've personally never seen racism against Latinos or blacks during hiring. Probably the the most diverse place I worked at had no such quotas. My point is there shouldn't be hiring quotas by race.
- notsayinmch 1y ago[flagged]
- mmooss 1y ago> I've personally never seen racism against Latinos or blacks during hiring. There are mountains of research and witnesses. What does your statement mean? Also, maybe you weren't aware of how they made their hiring choice? People don't usually openly say they are doing it for racist reasons. > My point is there shouldn't be hiring quotas by race. I don't think DEI is implemented by quotas usually, nor is racism. For example, I had a recruiter I relied on heavily. I realized that they only sent me white guys to interview (with one exception). I have no idea why, but I know the recruiter found people through their own networks, and I bet those networks - usually formed from people we've gone to school with, worked with, socialized with, family, etc. - was white people, and that's who is added to the network. It's self-perpetuating - white people know white people. IIRC, AirBnB's founder knew someone at YC via their MIT fraternity - what do you think they probably looked like (I'm not criticizing AirBnB founders at all - they did amazing; for all I know they are big proponents of DEI)? (There are so many white people - ~60% of the population or ~200 million in the US - that you can spend your entire life without knowing anyone else.) And look around the office of your IT organization; if someone was black, what is the chance that they'd know someone who would help them get a job there? One method of DEI in hiring is to require that a person from a minority is interviewed for every position (in IT, that includes women). By me requiring that, my recruiter was required to develop networks that included many minorities, and I hope those people - now in the network - got opportunities for other jobs too.
- kgwxd 1y ago[flagged]
- winrid 1y agoIt wasn't one candidate. Multiple were turned away to wait for someone to fill the diversity quota. It took several months.
- shakna 1y agoCool. But DEI practices happened not because of anecdotes, but data on systemic bias - which endangers multiple generations of people. A responsible government will act on the data, rather than a gut feeling.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- kelseyfrog 1y agoBut anti-DEI policy allowed a group in the process of losing status to name and point to a target. The function of removing DEI is to relieve them of the feeling that their status was under attack.
- garciasn 1y ago[flagged]
- FridayoLeary 1y agoOne can argue that DEI itself is racist.
- andrei_says_ 1y ago[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- amy_petrik 1y ago[flagged]
- epistasis 1y agoOne can argue nearly anything, that doesn't make the argument correct or sound.
- 1y ago
- epistasis 1y agoThat is illegal and they should have talked to HR about what DEI is, because it's certainly not that!
- RHSeeger 1y agoI don't think anyone with a brain thinks that the DEI rules don't provide benefit to people of a minority at the expense of the people in the majority. But they also provide benefits to the minority as a whole against the system as a whole, to help raise them up from the lower starting point they been pushed into. And it's a balance between individual unfairness (negative impact to individuals of the majority) and systematic fairness (positive impact to the minorities as a whole). The end goal is that all groups start at the same point and the nobody needs to be given preference because of their group. Anyone who thinks "you have to hire a certain amount/percentage of minorities" doesn't mean, by definition, that you will need to negatively impact _individual_ members of a majority hasn't spent any real time thinking about how it works. But the point is that it's worth it for society as a whole.
- umvi 1y ago> But the point is that it's worth it for society as a whole. Who decided/determined this? You state it as if positive discrimination is a proven social good, yet I don't think it's so clear. There's still a ton of debate around it, and different western countries have difference stances on it. To me it still seems like an experiment with unclear/unknown long term value to society.
- BobaFloutist 1y agoIf you believe human capabilities tend to follow a bell curve, and if you believe that minorities are statistically disadvantaged compared to their non-minority complement, that would seem to imply minorities are un(der)tapped as a market and as a labor pool. Which would suggest making a point to actively include them in your hiring and marketing funnel and at least slightly biasing those funnels in their favor would just be good business.
- Enginerrrd 1y agoYour reasoning is totally sound up until the final clause. The "correct" answer isn't biasing evaluation pipelines, it's ensuring you have proportional representation in the pool of applicants.
- tehwebguy 1y agoI bet they were lying, or that you are!
- winrid 1y agoI understand the concern, but I have no skin in the game to lie here. Actually it's fairly risky to say what I've said, but it frustrates me. Also, I do not think they would slip up and lie in such a way.