Amazon Releases (Not Many) Details On Its Workforce Demographics 123
theodp (442580) writes Late to the table on disclosing workforce demographics, Amazon posted a diversity report to its website on Halloween, revealing that its global work force is 63% male and 37% female, while in the U.S., its work force is 60% white, 15% black, 13% Asian and 9% Hispanic. More lacking in granular detail than the less-than-transparent diversity data provided by its tech peers, Rainbow PUSH said Amazon's numbers were not as good as they appeared, and criticized the company for a lack of candor. "Their general work force data released by Amazon seems intentionally deceptive, as the company did not include the race or gender breakout of their technical work force," PUSH said in a statement. "The broad assumption is that a high percentage of their black and Latino employees work in their warehouses." Following the lead of other tech companies, Diversity at Amazon suggests the e-tailer's undisclosed-but-presumed lack of tech diversity could be blamed on "female students and students of color [who] are opting out of technology and engineering" as early as middle school and high school. Taking a page from Google's playbook, Amazon pointed to its involvement with the Anita Borg Institute, Code.org, Girls Who Code, and the National Center for Women & Information Technology as ways the company's addressing tech diversity deficiencies.
Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:5, Insightful)
That organization has embodied weaponized identity politics to such an extent that an article quoting them non-ironically deserves dismissal.
Re:Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Never even address a false premise. It is not an companies responsibility to address the failures of particular minority communities to embrace technology education.
Rainbow/push just wants a payoff to go away and leave Amazon alone (see also Toyota and a buttload of other companies). Listening to them just empowers a bunch of extortionists and shows minority youth wrong ways/attitudes regarding success. Why study calculus when public relations/political science is so much more lucrative.
Re:Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:5, Interesting)
It is not an companies responsibility to address the failures of particular minority communities to embrace technology education.
Actually, it is. Affirmative Action doesn't require a company to hire anyone, but it does require companies to identify that minorities are underrepresented in employment applications and take measures to encourage more applications from underrepresented minorities.
Re: (Score:3)
it does require companies to identify that minorities are underrepresented in employment applications and take measures to encourage more applications from underrepresented minorities.
Why?
No, really, I don't get it. Why positively discriminate $this race versus $that race?
Re:Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Practical answer: it's cheaper than fixing either the underlying education problem or the underlying social problem.
Other answer: monocultures are natural. Businesses started by white people employ more white people. Not because of maliciousness or discrimination, just because they know more white people than the general population does. Affirmative Action allows particular groups that don't currently have a toe-hold to break into the existing monocultures.
Remember that the AA requires no hiring discrimination. It also doesn't require any success at all. You can say "I put an employment ad at Grambling State University and I got resumes from all white people", and you met your obligation.
Re: (Score:2)
The most effective way to increase the number of female experts in a given field is to hire the fathers of future experts.
The most effective way to increase the number of black experts in a given field is to hire the adoptive white parents of future experts.
Re:Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Required by whom? Under-represented how?
Do you measure representation based on the numbers of that minority in the community? If so, which community: city, county, state, nation, world? Or, do you measure representation based on the number of individuals that have entered the field?
What measures do they take? If someone whose skin is black or brown is under-represented do you pay those candidates more because of the color of their skin? If Asians are over-represented do you pay them less to discourage their entry in the industry and get their numbers "back in line?"
What makes race? If someone is born of multi-racial parents which race counts?
The problem with demands such as these is they don't seek to solve any supposed problem other than enriching their own pockets through consultation fees. If you are measuring workplace diversity based on the skin color you observe when you look at your fellow work mates then you are, ultimately, practicing a form of racism yourself.
Every proposed solution to this manufactured problem is in and of itself racist.
Rainbow PUSH doesn't want to believe in, and it's in their best interest to discourage, individual accomplishment and responsibility. If they fail to divide along skin color then they fail to enrich themselves through extortion. If we allow their division to continue then we continue to promote the very mechanisms that create inequality.
Re: (Score:2)
Required by whom? Under-represented how?
It's like ISO9001. You voluntarily take it up, and there are published standards you try to meet. You do it for similar reasons to ISO9001 too.
The problem with demands such as these is they don't seek to solve any supposed problem other than enriching their own pockets through consultation fees.
As I say, it's similar to ISO9001. At least in this instance though it has some useful purpose and improves society. I know some people think that business should only be interesting in maximizing profit and shareholder value, but actually many of them at least pretend to care about things like the environment and people.
Rainbow PUSH doesn't want to believe in, and it's in their best interest to discourage, individual accomplishment and responsibility.
You misunderstand. Hiring is still done on mer
Re: (Score:2)
That's right. A corporation's only responsibility is to enrich stockholders through ever-increasing profits by any means necessary. America, fuck yeah!
Re:Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, it's much easier to dismiss an article based on history than to engage with the actual arguments and numbers that are presented. /s
If the mob showed up at your door and asked to see the bookkeeping for your business and then asked "Why not? What do you have to hide?" I think that the history of the mobs behavior towards other businesses would be quite relevant. And that's exactly what's happening here.
Re:Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Any company looking to please an organization like that is wasting their time. They're basically just an extortion racket.
Re:Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:5, Insightful)
That organization has embodied weaponized identity politics to such an extent that an article quoting them non-ironically deserves dismissal.
http://articles.philly.com/200... [philly.com]
read that...
Most civil rights leaders are good people. But Jessi Jackson and Al Sharpton are crooks. Sharpton should literally be in prison. Those 2 have done more to harm the black community than any other modern political leader.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Those 2 have done more to harm the black community than any other modern political leader.
Your poor grammar notwithstanding, I'd think that the black community could make their own choices on who their leaders are and don't don't need white folk telling them which of their leaders are effective. Especially when it's the lazy white press who keeps more effective (albeit less visually stimulating) leaders in the shadows.
But whatever you want to say about them, it is still undeniable that there is racism in t
Re:Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd think that the black community could make their own choices on who their leaders are and don't don't need white folk telling them which of their leaders are effective. Especially when it's the lazy white press who keeps more effective (albeit less visually stimulating) leaders in the shadows.
Neither Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton have ever been elected or othrewise "choosen" by the black community. It is hard not to despise people who make their fortune on the backs of the people they claim to represent, like these two have.
Re:Rainbow PUSH said ... (Score:5, Interesting)
I am part of the black community. My sons black, I'm white. I go to "The Black American PTA meetings" as well as all of the black heritage festivals/meetings/conferences (and let me tell you, there are a LOT of them) even blended family clinics, and all that sort of stuff. The lack of black leaders and trying to get the community to stop idealizing sports stars is usually at the top of their agenda. Barrack Obama getting elected was probably the most important thing to ever happen to the black community in this country. My son has literally asked me to paint him white before. That's a hard thing for a father to take. My kids a handsome guy, and when he gets older the ladies will really dig him. But when he looks up to adults, who out there is successful and brown? Now I can point to the most powerful man in the free world and his skins the same shade.
As far as racism goes... yes. It's a big problem. Having a black son makes it abundantly clear. In the white community there's a lot of stupidity. "Why didn't you just get a kid from Murica!" and stuff like that. The only overt racism I've run into as been from the black community. But it was very few and far between and I only had one incident where the person flat out said I shouldn't be allowed to have that child, etc... But I chose to take that as concern for my son and took it in a positive light. They were hating on me and not my kid. I can deal with that.
Things might change when he's older. He's only 6 now. But he will have to get warned about the police. Now that I'm more concerned with the problem I see directly what the police do. The other day I went to the mall and the highschool let out for lunch so kids were walking through the parking lot to get to the food court. Cops rolled up on the 2 clicks of black males. None of the white kids were bothered. I started walking over to the squad car and then thought better of it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I have to say that a lot of the race talk these days does appear to come from blacks...
I'm white... I couldn't care less what color you are, you're a human being, just like me...
Yet between the media and other "leaders" like Jesse Jackson, it is race this and race that. I'm tired of it.
Those police rolled up on the black kids for a reason. Black kids commit more crimes than white kids do, look at the number of them in prison...
That isn't your fault, but the culture of black people needs to change. I do
Re: (Score:3)
That's not true. You're applying popular culture stereotypes to reality. For example, when I was a teenager, I had long hair and was into metal like Slayer and King Diamond. As a result many people thought I was a devil worshiper. Of course I wasn't... It makes no logical sense to worship the devil. lol
The same goes for Black popular culture. The bad guys are glamorized. Most black youth are no more robbers and thugs than I was a devil worshiper. I suspect that if you compared white crime with black crime,
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect that if you compared white crime with black crime, money stolen by whites would completely dwarf crime committed by blacks. Bernie Madoff anyone? Why does a 16yr old black kid deserve any more attention than some accountant in the same parking lot that's been embezzling money from his work for the past 3yrs?
Because Bernie Madoff didn't use a gun or a knife to take his loot.
Black kids do far more violent crime per capita than white kids do.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cj... [fbi.gov]
For murders, it is about 50/50 for whites and blacks. Except that we have FAR more white people than black people.
Stereotypes usually have some basis in reality.
Re: (Score:2)
According to your own chart there were 6.6million whites arrested and 2.7million blacks arrested.
In this country there are 197 million whites, 65 million blacks.
Therefor white crime rate is 3.33% and the black crime rate is 4.15% (this is of course not counting repeat offenses, your chart doesn't give me a way to calculate that)
That's using regular math from the FBI's stats. So African American's have a 0.8% increased risk of crime. So maybe it makes sense that they are at least slightly more prone to viole
Re: (Score:2)
According to your own chart there were 6.6million whites arrested and 2.7million blacks arrested.
You're looking at numbers of arrested? Meh, that doesn't mean much... Try the violent crime numbers, those are more interesting...
How about murders? Almost 50/50 split between white and black. Black people are three times more likely to commit a murder than white people.
Or so say the numbers. I would be willing to accept that some of that difference is due to more liberal prosecution of blacks over whites, I don't deny that exists.
But triple? That's a lot.
You bring up poverty... You're right, that is
Re: (Score:1)
Those police rolled up on the black kids for a reason. Black kids commit more crimes than white kids do, look at the number of them in prison...
You're wrong. Black people and white people use drugs such as marijuana at the same rates in every study done. Black people are FAR more likely to be stopped, searched and arrested for simple possession though. Think about it. If you "know" black people are criminals, then you will stop them more often. Even though they don't use anymore than whites, they will be stopped and arrested more often. White kids (sometimes) get breaks and not charge, or probation. Blacks don't get those breaks as often.
And I say
Re: (Score:1)
Black people are FAR more likely to be stopped, searched and arrested for simple possession though.
Perhaps, but they are also FAR more likely to commit violent crime such as murder.
Whites outnumber blacks by 4 to 1 in this county, yet both groups commit about equal numbers of murders.
Re: (Score:2)
Why did the police need to roll up on anyone?
That is a fair question, and we don't have enough information to answer it.
Perhaps those kids were "known" troublemakers? Perhaps they had runins in the past with the cops? Or perhaps they were guilty of being black (yes, I know that still happens).
Re: (Score:2)
I'd think that the black community could make their own choices on who their leaders are and don't don't need white folk telling them which of their leaders are effective
Unbelievable arrogance.
1. The black community is not monolithic. "They" do not make choices. Black people make choices.
2. White people can have an opinion on something and black people can have an opinion on the same thing. They can even disagree! There's no need to shield black people from exposure to opinions by other people.
Better check yourself for racism bud.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, they should look at what happened to the Nazis, precisely the same thing, without the extermination part, so far...
Is this a Jesse Jackson thing? He is today's Joseph Goebbels... Nothing but trouble, like the black Al Haig, saying, *I'm in charge here.*, after King was shot. It's a shame to see anybody following him and Sharpton.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Organizations like this are fatally lazy, in that they like to quote statistics and suggest that any incomplete data must be hiding something nefarious-- rather than doing the investigation themselves."
In lots of civilized countries where these companies have their businesses, it' is forbidden by law to make racial, religious an other records of citizens, for employees it's a serious No-No.
If Amazon Germany or France would present a report with racial details, the justice would fall on them like several th
Re: (Score:2)
In America, the federal government requires companies to track all of this but forbids companies to actually use the information. Federal law in the US basically requires companies to collect evidence that they are or are not breaking racial laws.
It sucks, but so do many aspects of law in all countries.
Diversity bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
What is the diversity deficiency really mean? Asians are overrepresented as a share of the general population, there seems to be underrepresention in whites. Why do Asians not count for the purposes of this diversity calculation?
Let's be honest and admit you really want more blacks admitted at the expense of other groups. That's what the diversity these race baiters really want.
Re:Diversity bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)
"Diversity" groups don't like to talk about Asians because they disprove the myth than a once-oppressed race in the U.S. can never overcome their oppression through hard work and education. They're embarrassed that Asians don't just sit around on their asses blaming white people for all their problems.
Re: (Score:1)
When Japanese were put in American concentration camps in World War II.
Re: (Score:1)
Not defending it, but it's still important to understand these things in context.
Re:Diversity bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
Interment camps, not concentration camps. Also, interment wasn't done from a desire to oppress the Japanese, but out of fear of the Japanese Empire. So it's not so much that the Americans felt the Japanese inferior, but rather that they feared a full scale invasion of the west coast by the Japanese Empire.
Not defending it, but it's still important to understand these things in context.
Indeed, context is everything.
We put American citizens of Japanese descent in concentration camps (a weasel word like "internment camp" doesn't change what it was).
We put American citizens of German descent in charge of our armed forces (Eisenhower, for example. He was Pennsylvania Dutch, who are of German descent).
Re: (Score:1)
America did put Germans and Italians in concentration camps. They were usually foreign aliens, though (like taking South American Germans in order to protect important industries there).
There's two good reasons for this:
1.) Riots. In the case of the Japanese, taking heavy losses in the Pacific might end up causing riots/violence in the U.S. by people who want revenge.
2.) Nationalism. Of the Axis Powers, one was absolutely nationalistic (Nazi Germany), one was mostly nationalistic (Japan), and another was
Re: (Score:1)
I also forgot to mention that there was U.S. propaganda telling people not get upset/angry at certain Captains of Industry with German names. Apparently, the last war (and the contemporary one) convinced a segment of the population to hate all Germans. So, there's that.
Re:Diversity bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)
Interment camps, not concentration camps. Also, interment wasn't done from a desire to oppress the Japanese, but out of fear of the Japanese Empire. So it's not so much that the Americans felt the Japanese inferior, but rather that they feared a full scale invasion of the west coast by the Japanese Empire.
Not defending it, but it's still important to understand these things in context.
What's in a name? Here's George Takei (Sulu) who actually was in one of these camps: http://www.ted.com/talks/george_takei_why_i_love_a_country_that_once_betrayed_me
That is the MOST positive light in which I've ever seen these portrayed and they still sound damned horrifying to me.
As an aside, Asians have long been discriminated against, you can read journals of people in the old west who fucking hated them. California considered and sometimes passed really discriminatory measures against them. Anyone who doesn't know this is woefully ignorant of history, my freaking 7th grade kid knows this.
Re: (Score:2)
when has Asian been oppressed in U.S.
Suggest you research the origins of the phrase "Chinaman's chance in hell."
Re: (Score:3)
Oblig: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H... [wikipedia.org]
First paragraph should suffice.
Re: (Score:3)
Let me think.. "The Anti-Coolie Act of 1862", "Naturalization Act of 1870", "Chinese Exclusion Act"....
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
chinese laborers were brought in to work on railroads and they were very much discrminated against in the past. Not so much during the "civil rights era" and since.
Re: (Score:1)
You're the idiot. He said as a percentage of the population. 3.1% of the US is Asian, 12.1% is black. Do the math.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You can't treat everybody the same and expect everybody to come to the same outcome since everybody is different. If you want the same outcome, you have to start treating some people different from others.
I remember when I saw a feminist on 60 minutes or something several years ago. She was upset that there weren't enough women on the FDNY. The problem was that anybody looking to join was given equal treatment and asked to pass the
Fill the Gap (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Fill the Gap (Score:5, Insightful)
Why are Women and Minorities (not including Male Asians) being permitted to opt out of technology education?
This! Skin pigment and chromosonal quota perfection in every walk of life is so much more important than any other thing that might make someone choose something else to do that we should force people to study things in which they're not interested. Because that way, we can be sure that they'll be passionate about hating it even more, so that when they apply for that quota-mandated position, we know they'll be miserable SOBs to work with, and productivity will be sure to suffer, for which we'll be sure to blame Evil Corporations.
Jesse Jackson is a hypocritical, lying fool. His agenda (which is to extort money from public and private institutions so that he and his entourage can spend their time well compensated for doing nothing but whining) is utterly transparent. But it plugs right into the Nanny State world view, which requires professional quota referees for every last thing, including the size of your drink cup and the precise tone of the skin of the programmer in the cube next to you.
Jackson is complaining that Amazon's stats aren't precise enough, but I notice he's not calling for stats about the measured skills and academic records of the couldn't-get-hired-there folks he thinks should be qualified strictly on cosmetic grounds. If he thinks that the members of a particular racial group aren't landing enough jobs at Amazon, he should be turning to that group and lecturing them about developing the critical thinking, communication, technical, entrepreneurial, scientific, and related skills that make someone a shoe-in for such jobs. ALL of that starts at home, and is pretty well viable or terminally broken by the time a kid is half way through elementary school. And THAT is all about the culture out of which that kid emerges. About which Jackson should be doing some serious introspection, if he could stand to look at himself in the mirror. He not only deliberately confuses race with culture, but he deliberately confuses cause and effect - all so that he can thunder on about it, threaten boycotts, and receive grant money from his extortion victims. This is just another round of his racketeering outfit doing what it does.
Re: (Score:2)
I recall empty seats in some university level tech classes while some were told the class was full. Apparently the empty seats were for non-attending (non-registered) minorities.
So not only are minorities not taking advantage of the education available, but they are interfering with the education of those that want to be there.
I'm not a fan of PUSH, but they have a point (Score:4, Insightful)
Comparing Amazon to Google or Facebook, is really apples-to-oranges, given that they're in very different businesses.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. I'd bet real money that the delta between the mean and median salary at Amazon is a lot bigger than at Facebook or Google.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Last I checked Seattle is also a hell of a lot whiter than Silicon Valley.
According to BestPlaces.net
Seattle 70.60% White
San Jose, CA 47.00% White
Mountain View, CA 59.70% White
I'm all for skewering Amazon, but... (Score:3)
I'm just not sure how much I hold them responsible for lack of diversity in their ranks. Show me the diversity in the set of resumes they receive and interviews they conduct and I'll get on your bandwagon, but until then my experience says that the reasons for lack of diversity begin much earlier in the funnel.
Re:I'm all for skewering Amazon, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
If the diversity of new hires is significantly different from the diversity of resumes, that is potential evidence of hiring discrimination. If the diversity of resumes is significantly different from the makeup of the community, then the company has obligations under Affirmative Action to actively seek resumes of underrepresented minorities. Affirmative Action was implemented the way it is specifically because the problem is earlier in the funnel and makes an easy excuse for lack of diversity in the workplace.
In other words, none of the numbers that are being discussed matter. Given the environment today, it is expected that minorities should be underrepresented at tech companies. There is no cutoff number between a good company and a bad company. Two things matter - are they acting fairly on the resumes they receive (as you stated), and are they being proactive to encourage minorities to apply. Neither of these can be inferred from the data presented. PUSH is using this uncertainty to make its own unfounded claims. Amazon's best course of action would be to disclose more information to shut them up.
Re: (Score:2)
" the company has obligations under Affirmative Action "
"affirmative action" is not an obligation. It is a (poor) choice.
Re: (Score:3)
Only if misunderstood. If you believe Affirmative Action restricts your ability to hire whomever you want, then you don't understand it.
The ideal outcome of Affirmative Action is that you find a great employee that you never would have found before. Everyone wins. In general AA does have some costs - specifically it requires companies to expend recruiting effort in areas that are likely to be less fruitful than they would have otherwise. But it balances against the "let's ask everyone we know if they know a
Re: (Score:2)
"Everyone wins."
Not the person farther down the Desirable Minority totem pole who was overlooked.
Re: (Score:1)
Everyone wins.
I have a cousin who was turned away from schools for gender/race reasons, because Affirmative Action said the school had too many of that particular gender/race.
Tell me again how everyone wins?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Are there businesses that, without Affirmative Action, would hire only white males? Yes. Should something be done about that? Sure.
Why? If I want to have a business that hires only white males, what is the problem with that?
My business, my choice... Now, I might find that blacks and Asians and a lot of whites even don't want to do business with me because of it, and that is their choice. So it might be in my best interests to hire other people.
Look at Hooters, some idiot sued them because he was a man and wanted to work there, and they only hire girls. He lost, BTW. Hooters also only hires (or tries to) pretty girls. What about a
Re: (Score:2)
Being ugly isn't a protected class. If it were, then the modeling industry would collapse. Feel free to discriminate on the basis of beauty.
If you want to only hire whites, why? There is no justification for it that doesn't trace back to blatant racism. Same with hiring only blacks. You already live in a country where you can't "do whatever you want". From the obvious big stuff like you can't kill people, to smaller but pretty universal things like you can't take other people's stuff (under most circumstanc
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to only hire whites, why?
I personally don't, but if I had to guess, I'd say that people like being around people who look like them.
Think of it as similar to a company started by young people largely hiring young people. A bunch of 20-something kids starting a tech company probably doesn't hire too many 60 year olds the first year, now do they?
From the obvious big stuff like you can't kill people
Yes, because doing so deprives someone else of their liberty, I think everyone gets that.
My choice to only hire whites or blacks or purples... doesn't deprive anyone of anything...
Then you get down to more touchy subjects like you can't kick out a tenant that doesn't pay without a certain period of notice.
Actually,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What you are asking for is the pre-Civil Rights Act south to be brought back.
No, because that was the government enforcing it... that was wrong... Blacks legally couldn't do a lot of things back then, including vote!
I would not want that brought back, rather I'd like to see private people still have the right to do business with whomever they want. It is like the government telling you who you must be friends with.
Re: (Score:2)
But thanks to Affirmative Action, I must now toss, say, 50 of those resumes because we have too many of the particular gender/race combos from those resumes
Doing this is illegal. It's not what Affirmative Action means, it's how other racists want it implemented. I have no idea why people still think this way since it was over thirty years ago [wikipedia.org] when the courts clearly stated that a racial quota is illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
... "racial quota is illegal"
So the same monster is simply dressed up in a different costume.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If the diversity of resumes is significantly different from the makeup of the community, then the company has obligations under Affirmative Action to actively seek resumes of underrepresented minorities.
I think that should be the first thing to investigate: is the diversity of resumes diferent from the makeup of the community? As a student in comp sci, I can tell you that thus far I've seen an overwhelming majority of white males. Women are rare, blacks are rare, hispanics are rare, even asians are rare. I don't claim this to be representative, but I think we should start at the source instead of blaming a company for it. If the job seekers of that particular ethnicity/gender just aren't there, what are th
Re: (Score:3)
I think that should be the first thing to investigate: is the diversity of resumes diferent from the makeup of the community?
Good point. Amazon didn't disclose enough information to infer this.
If the job seekers of that particular ethnicity/gender just aren't there, what are they going to do?
Make a good faith effort. All that Affirmative Action has ever required of anyone is to try. They may even be doing it. If so, they should disclose the data to put the argument to rest.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Should not be equality when hiring for tech (Score:1)
Not everyone can do the job, you need the best. If there's an opening and 1000 white guys apply and one black guy applies, does the latter get the job just because he's black? How is that fair? They should all be interviewed and may the most skilled win. In the warehouse, anyone can do that job, and only there should diversity be equal.
Re: (Score:2)
If there's an opening and 1000 white guys apply and one black guy applies, does the latter get the job just because he's black?
to the politically correct crowd, if he doesnt get the job, the company is racist. even though in a pool of 1001, and with only 1 job opening, he has a 1 in 1001 chance of being the best.
Re:Should not be equality when hiring for tech (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem isn't hiring the 1 or one of the 1,000.
It's also not a problem if your 1001 qualified applicants were the entire pool of available applicants.
It's only a problem if you didn't fairly seek out qualified applicants. If you posted your job only on White World Magazine, then you've got a problem.
I worked for a company in the late 90's that was founded by a number of ex-military types. They started actively recruiting ex-military officers. While that certainly sounded to them like a great way to get like-minded people who had a good work ethic and shared their idea of structure and order, it skewed their candidate pool drastically toward white males. They weren't casting the net wide enough.
From a hiring perspective, that's all you have to do -- make sure you're casting the net wide enough, and then fairly choose the best applicants.
Re: (Score:1)
They are arguing that the white people have ALL the cushy jobs, and the rest of the races have all the bad warehouse jobs.
Well that does it. (Score:2)
They'll get no more of my money until Bezos has a sex change.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Genital tech? Some new language or something? (Score:2)
I keep hearing about "women in technology " and such on Slashdot. Is there some new programming language or something that involves the worker using their genitals to do the job? Something new that makes one's crotch relevant in IT?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Genital tech? Some new language or something? (Score:5, Interesting)
Generally the idea is that a broader diversity of backgrounds allows more ideas to pop up, which can mean better software.
In practice, its tricky, because the argument mixes "Both genders are equal! They can do anything the other can!" while at the same time going "One gender can give a different perspective on things because they think differently and approach problems differently!".
A more practical example could be: part of your customer base is female. Having more women on staff could help you get the appropriate perspective to better target them.
The issue with that is: A) companies that have UX departments already have a lot of women in it. B) if the ideas to better target women come from guts feeling and sentences that start with "I think this is better!" instead of analytics data, you're going to make the wrong decision anyway, because the people in the IT department, regardless of gender, will have a different background and a skewed perception relative to the customers, so it won't really help.
My significant other who works at Amazon (a woman software engineer, woo!) had that issue recently. The UX people design a mockup, based on statistics, history, what competitors do, what has been A/B tested, etc. During implementation on the engineering side, one of the PMs (a woman, working with said significant other) goes "No this sucks! Its not intuitive! In Excel things work like this! Lets change everything!", with no backing arguments beyond "she doesn't like it". Then when people explain all the process that lead to that UI, of course: "I'm a woman, i have a different perspective and you refuse to acknowledge it!!".
Which was hilarious said she said that to another woman...
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to be female to be an idiot in Product Management. I've worked with fools of both sexes in that particular arena. But you know what? They actually go out and talk to customers. They do (not as often nor as quickly as I'd like, but occasionally) get fired for their poor decisions. Besides, why do you think your engineering team has better insight than folks who actually talk to customers and do it well enough to get paid to do so? Especially when it comes from a UX department, whose artistic "
You mean (Score:3, Insightful)
"The broad assumption is that a high percentage of their black and Latino employees work in their warehouses."
You mean they discriminate against White and Asian warehouse employees?
Re: (Score:2)
"The broad assumption is that a high percentage of their black and Latino employees work in their warehouses."
You mean they discriminate against White and Asian warehouse employees?
I think it's obvious that most people would agree that working as a software delevoper is preferable to working in a warehouse.
There's a strong argument that Amazon isn't the one to blame for it's poor diversity among the technical ranks. But I think it's far from ideal that high status jobs are overwhelmingly held by Whites and East Asians while Blacks and Hispanics struggle to get even low status work.
who cares? (Score:1)
Proof of racism! (Score:2)
Amazon demographic of African Americans: 15%
USA 2010 census African Americans: 12.6%
There we have it, proof of racism within Amazon. I eagerly await Jessie Jackson's protests of non-black victims.
Simple answer for all demographics... (Score:2)
...your workforce is 100% human.
Race is an illusion, an arbitrary social construct with no biological basis - using it as some sort of measure of proper employment ratios is just as useful as trying to get a proper mix of Firefly and Star Wars fans.
Re: (Score:1)