6 ms·

With all the sex discrimination and harassment charges, I sometimes wonder if founders get subconsciously influenced that hiring women can increase the risk of

by sinatra 12y ago

With all the sex discrimination and harassment charges, I sometimes wonder if founders get subconsciously influenced that hiring women can increase the risk of lawsuits to their companies. Not fair, I know! But you aren't thinking about fairness when it comes to your business that already has too many issues to take care of.

nedwin 12y ago
I think they're more likely thinking two different thoughts. 1. How can I hire great people? 2. How can I create a culture where women aren't discriminated against?
- iopq 12y ago
  3. Why is my employee taking so much maternal leave when I need her to be here?
  - Crito 12y ago
    A possible solution to that is to mandate that all men also be given maternal (paternal?) leave when their partner has a child. It would not completely eliminate the imbalance, since of course not every woman who gives birth has a male partner, but it should at least improve the situation.
    - mahouse 12y ago
      So the solution is to reduce also the productivity of men? Looks more like a punishment to me.
      - Crito 12y ago
        It would be paid leave, and optional of course, so the men would not punished. You could perhaps claim that the corporation was being "punished", but you could claim that forcing corporations to give maternal leave in the first place is "punishing" them. A certain amount of "punishment" of corporations is to be expected. In reality, "punishment" is just "regulation that aims to modify the properties of a corporation". Manipulative, not punitive.
        mahouse 12y ago
        Ah! But if it's optional, I can only assume a lot of men would not opt for it, while women would probably be forced to take it at least for the first few weeks. In an ideal world, from my point of view, leaves would be both equal and mandatory.
        Crito 12y ago
        > "I can only assume a lot of men would not opt for it," Of course. There is no silver bullet. If you are expecting one, you will be perpetually disappointed.
        mahouse 12y ago
        That's why I say it should be mandatory :-)
        Crito 12y ago
        Still not a silver bullet. Women would still be disproportionately effected and it would further incentivize discrimination on the basis of family status. You can tweak the parameters back and forth, but every solution will be imperfect. There is also the matter of if it would be mandatory for women. If so, that would be discriminatory against women, as single women would more frequently be forced to put their careers on hold than single men. If it is mandatory for men but not women, that is also discriminatory. Currently in the US, women cannot be forced to take maternity leave: http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-preg.html http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-preg.html
      - emodendroket 12y ago
        Yeah, hoo boy, I'm really suffering by being granted leave.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
  - chrisBob 12y ago
    A company with good family leave policies shouldn't care, or even notice if you are male or female. Part of reducing discrimination should be taking away the idea that women are the only ones who can take care of a kid!
  - amputect 12y ago
    I think it's better and more useful to ask "Why is my company so dysfunctional that I can't afford to have someone out on vacation?" Remember that the difference between someone taking maternity leave, and someone quitting, is that people come back from maternity leave. If your company is so short-staffed that you can't afford to have someone out of office on maternity leave (or paternity leave, or even just a normal long vacation that they've saved up PTO for), then what are you going to do when those same people simply quit? The net effect is the same: you are now even more understaffed, but it's a permanent problem instead of a temporary one.
    - sp332 12y ago
      Why would I hire extra people just in case some of them leave? I'd wait until an employee said s/he was going to leave and then hire someone to replace them.
    - TeMPOraL 12y ago
      If it wasn't for the regulations you wouldn't even have vacation or maternity leave. It's capitalism, when you're in competition, any value you can throw under the bus to become more competetive will go under the bus - either you'll do it, or one of your competitors. The answer to the question "why is my company so dysfunctional" is often "because it can't afford to not be".
    - jiggy2011 12y ago
      In a country with statutory maternity leave the maximum maternity period is much longer than the average holiday (The UK allows up to a full year). So you have to fill the gap by hiring another developer with the same skills who is happy to work on a temporary contract which might be more difficult and expensive than finding someone seeking a permanent position especially if you require rare skills. Industries where skills and certifications are more standarised don't seem to have this problem.
      - chrisBob 12y ago
        For comparison in the US: My wife and I recently took about 60 days of leave (paid) when our daughter was born, but paid leave is uncommon in many industries. Federal law requires the employer to let you take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave after giving birth, and does not guarantee any pre-birth leave.
  - jsmthrowaway 12y ago
    Always good to see the outright, unfiltered sexism make an appearance here.
    - Demiurge 12y ago
      If you think that the hypothetical quote implies the author agrees with it, why? When thinking about how to deal with sexist society, is it not important to understand all behaviors, illogical, immoral or sexist, in order to make things better for the disadvantaged?
sp332 12y ago
It's not really subconscious. https://twitter.com/ebekiel/status/573627588708446208 https://twitter.com/ebekiel/status/573627588708446208 https://recode.net/2015/03/16/the-most-dangerous-meme-in-the-paokleiner-trial-now-no-one-will-hire-women/ https://recode.net/2015/03/16/the-most-dangerous-meme-in-the...
nostromo 12y ago
It's a cruel irony that being in a protected class might make it harder to get a job.
ivanca 12y ago
Yes, and if you hire -for example- black paraplegic dwarfs you are going to deal with even more discrimination lawsuits. Of course this isn't like it should be, is just the historical legacy of homogeneity on communities, is been this way for millions of years so it will take a lot time to change it.
- xienze 12y ago
  Upvoted, because this is the flipside to "diversity" that a lot of people fail to acknowledge. Diversity can have positive effects on your group/community/organization but it also increases the likelihood of tension that might otherwise have not existed.
- emodendroket 12y ago
  If you systematically avoid hiring them you are also subject to lawsuits...
  - ivanca 12y ago
    Actually no, because for it to be systematic there must be enough cases to be noticeable, and also they must pass all aptitude tests, and sometimes that puts some people in disadvantage: for example if one of the test for a new position is heavy lifting men will be the majority of the ones being selected, you can call it discrimination but is the same way choosing only people with computer degrees is discrimination.
    - emodendroket 12y ago
      Maybe with the contrived example the OP offered, but classes like "women" and "nonwhite people" are pretty large.

by sinatra 12y ago

nedwin 12y ago

I think they're more likely thinking two different thoughts. 1. How can I hire great people? 2. How can I create a culture where women aren't discriminated against?

iopq 12y ago
3. Why is my employee taking so much maternal leave when I need her to be here?
- Crito 12y ago
  A possible solution to that is to mandate that all men also be given maternal (paternal?) leave when their partner has a child. It would not completely eliminate the imbalance, since of course not every woman who gives birth has a male partner, but it should at least improve the situation.
  - mahouse 12y ago
    So the solution is to reduce also the productivity of men? Looks more like a punishment to me.
    - Crito 12y ago
      It would be paid leave, and optional of course, so the men would not punished. You could perhaps claim that the corporation was being "punished", but you could claim that forcing corporations to give maternal leave in the first place is "punishing" them. A certain amount of "punishment" of corporations is to be expected. In reality, "punishment" is just "regulation that aims to modify the properties of a corporation". Manipulative, not punitive.
      - mahouse 12y ago
        Ah! But if it's optional, I can only assume a lot of men would not opt for it, while women would probably be forced to take it at least for the first few weeks. In an ideal world, from my point of view, leaves would be both equal and mandatory.
        Crito 12y ago
        > "I can only assume a lot of men would not opt for it," Of course. There is no silver bullet. If you are expecting one, you will be perpetually disappointed.
        mahouse 12y ago
        That's why I say it should be mandatory :-)
        Crito 12y ago
        Still not a silver bullet. Women would still be disproportionately effected and it would further incentivize discrimination on the basis of family status. You can tweak the parameters back and forth, but every solution will be imperfect. There is also the matter of if it would be mandatory for women. If so, that would be discriminatory against women, as single women would more frequently be forced to put their careers on hold than single men. If it is mandatory for men but not women, that is also discriminatory. Currently in the US, women cannot be forced to take maternity leave: http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-preg.html http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-preg.html
    - emodendroket 12y ago
      Yeah, hoo boy, I'm really suffering by being granted leave.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- chrisBob 12y ago
  A company with good family leave policies shouldn't care, or even notice if you are male or female. Part of reducing discrimination should be taking away the idea that women are the only ones who can take care of a kid!
- amputect 12y ago
  I think it's better and more useful to ask "Why is my company so dysfunctional that I can't afford to have someone out on vacation?" Remember that the difference between someone taking maternity leave, and someone quitting, is that people come back from maternity leave. If your company is so short-staffed that you can't afford to have someone out of office on maternity leave (or paternity leave, or even just a normal long vacation that they've saved up PTO for), then what are you going to do when those same people simply quit? The net effect is the same: you are now even more understaffed, but it's a permanent problem instead of a temporary one.
  - sp332 12y ago
    Why would I hire extra people just in case some of them leave? I'd wait until an employee said s/he was going to leave and then hire someone to replace them.
  - TeMPOraL 12y ago
    If it wasn't for the regulations you wouldn't even have vacation or maternity leave. It's capitalism, when you're in competition, any value you can throw under the bus to become more competetive will go under the bus - either you'll do it, or one of your competitors. The answer to the question "why is my company so dysfunctional" is often "because it can't afford to not be".
  - jiggy2011 12y ago
    In a country with statutory maternity leave the maximum maternity period is much longer than the average holiday (The UK allows up to a full year). So you have to fill the gap by hiring another developer with the same skills who is happy to work on a temporary contract which might be more difficult and expensive than finding someone seeking a permanent position especially if you require rare skills. Industries where skills and certifications are more standarised don't seem to have this problem.
    - chrisBob 12y ago
      For comparison in the US: My wife and I recently took about 60 days of leave (paid) when our daughter was born, but paid leave is uncommon in many industries. Federal law requires the employer to let you take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave after giving birth, and does not guarantee any pre-birth leave.
- jsmthrowaway 12y ago
  Always good to see the outright, unfiltered sexism make an appearance here.
  - Demiurge 12y ago
    If you think that the hypothetical quote implies the author agrees with it, why? When thinking about how to deal with sexist society, is it not important to understand all behaviors, illogical, immoral or sexist, in order to make things better for the disadvantaged?

sp332 12y ago

It's not really subconscious. https://twitter.com/ebekiel/status/573627588708446208 https://twitter.com/ebekiel/status/573627588708446208 https://recode.net/2015/03/16/the-most-dangerous-meme-in-the-paokleiner-trial-now-no-one-will-hire-women/ https://recode.net/2015/03/16/the-most-dangerous-meme-in-the...

nostromo 12y ago

It's a cruel irony that being in a protected class might make it harder to get a job.

ivanca 12y ago

Yes, and if you hire -for example- black paraplegic dwarfs you are going to deal with even more discrimination lawsuits. Of course this isn't like it should be, is just the historical legacy of homogeneity on communities, is been this way for millions of years so it will take a lot time to change it.

xienze 12y ago
Upvoted, because this is the flipside to "diversity" that a lot of people fail to acknowledge. Diversity can have positive effects on your group/community/organization but it also increases the likelihood of tension that might otherwise have not existed.
emodendroket 12y ago
If you systematically avoid hiring them you are also subject to lawsuits...
- ivanca 12y ago
  Actually no, because for it to be systematic there must be enough cases to be noticeable, and also they must pass all aptitude tests, and sometimes that puts some people in disadvantage: for example if one of the test for a new position is heavy lifting men will be the majority of the ones being selected, you can call it discrimination but is the same way choosing only people with computer degrees is discrimination.
  - emodendroket 12y ago
    Maybe with the contrived example the OP offered, but classes like "women" and "nonwhite people" are pretty large.