Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Yahoo's Diversity Record Is Almost As Bad As Google's

Unknown Lamer posted about a month ago | from the hiring-bias dept.

Businesses 435

theodp (442580) writes Comparing Yahoo's diversity numbers to Google's, writes Valleywag's Nitasha Tiku, is "like comparing rotten apples to rotten oranges." Two weeks after Google disclosed it wasn't "where we want to be" with its 17% female and 1% Black U.S. tech workforce, Yahoo revealed its diversity numbers aren't that much better than Google's, with a U.S. tech workforce that's 35% female and 1% Black. The charts released by Yahoo indicate women fare worse in its global tech workforce, only 15% of which is female. So, with Google and Yahoo having checked in, isn't it about time for U.S. workforce expert Mark Zuckerberg and company to stop taking the Fifth and ante up numbers to show students what kind of opportunities Facebook offers?

cancel ×

435 comments

Most qualified and motivated candidates? (5, Insightful)

headkase (533448) | about a month ago | (#47261725)

I thought that competitive business was supposed to hire the most qualified and motivated candidates? Seriously, get out there, carve out your own space, and get hired! "Diversity" is just a politically correct buzzword and is not guaranteed to lead to an agile workforce..

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (0, Troll)

u38cg (607297) | about a month ago | (#47261761)

Can you provide some evidence that the wimmin and minorities are neither motivated nor qualified?

Re: Most qualified and motivated candidates? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261777)

Since when did he imply that?

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (5, Insightful)

headkase (533448) | about a month ago | (#47261787)

I never said either group was anything. I said the most qualified and motivated people get jobs in a perfect world. Affirmative action for its own sake, conversely, is discrimination against people who worked their butts off for a position and were passed over because they were the wrong gender or color.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (-1, Troll)

u38cg (607297) | about a month ago | (#47261861)

If you say the most qualified get jobs, and the jobs are going to men, then the women most be less qualified. No? All I am asking is for you to back that statement up: either show women are underqualified/less motivated. The alternative is that job allocation is actually not 100% meritocratic.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (4, Insightful)

Entropius (188861) | about a month ago | (#47261897)

Or, perhaps, there are simply fewer women seeking positions in tech firms for whatever reason?

Perhaps women are being guided away from technical pursuits at an early age by the gender stereotypes of their parents and teachers. Perhaps they have freely chosen to do other things. Neither is Yahoo/Google's problem. There are plenty of scenarios where they're simply hiring qualified people who apply for positions, and less than half of those happen to be women.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (-1, Troll)

u38cg (607297) | about a month ago | (#47262023)

So why is there such a disparity between Google & Yahoo's female proportions? Seriously, none of this shit passes the smell test. Women don't want to do this. Black people don't like doing that. It's utter bullshit from top to bottom. It's not nice to admit there is a massive fucking problem here but the first step really is admitting it.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (5, Insightful)

BobMcD (601576) | about a month ago | (#47262177)

I think your definition of "massive fucking problem" is different than the one commonly used.

Where are the women who aren't getting the tech jobs they want? If they're rallying in the streets, the news sure isn't covering it.

No, I suspect this is just another chapter in the Millenials' war on 'privilege'.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261969)

Why do you overlook the obvious (and true) explanation? Due to a combination of social pressures and differential appeal of the CS career path between the sexes, fewer women attempt to train for CS careers. Therefore the qualified pool of female CS workers is smaller without saying *anything* about the average female CS worker being underqualified or less motivated (I'd expect the opposite -- due to social pressure, only the really good women stick with it).

It's the other way around for doctors. Why aren't you whining about that training process being sexist?

Re: Most qualified and motivated candidates? (1)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about a month ago | (#47262045)

You start with the presumption that he suggested men are being chosen over women and that women are competing.

He was actually suggesting that there are not women to compete with in many positions, and that without offering a handicap to positions they are competing in, diversity is a pipe dream.

I.e. if 70% of engineering jobs have 10% female applicants and the rest have 50%, all other things being equal, the mix may be 78% male, 22% female, from a completely non discriminatory hiring practice.

Not the fault of the company (driven by profit motives) for doing anything discriminatory or nefarious.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47262171)

I never said either group was anything. I said the most qualified and motivated people get jobs in a perfect world.

Yet we don't live in a perfect world. People do discriminate based on race, gender, appearance and a whole bunch of other things that have nothing to do with ability to perform the job. Affirmative action is one attempt to fix that. Whether it works, or is the best way to do so, is a more complicated matter.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261797)

Not motivated - Women care more about careers like nursing and teaching elementary school, minorities care more about trying to make it big as a baller, rapper, or other field that doesn't require much education.

Not qualified - Very few women and minorities graduate with degrees in computer science or engineering.

You can argue between the causes (genetics, society, discrimination, etc.), but you can't refute these facts are true on the whole.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261973)

And you'll get modded down for speaking the truth. I guarantee it.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (1)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about a month ago | (#47261979)

Not qualified - Very few women and minorities graduate with degrees in computer science or engineering.

Not true. Most Silicon Valley companies, including both Yahoo and Google, have a tech workforce that is mostly non-white. I spoke at a CS seminar at UC Berkeley last month, and I was the only white person in the room. Most minorities are over represented in tech. It is only blacks, and to a lesser extent, Hispanics, that are not.

 

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (1)

bberens (965711) | about a month ago | (#47262211)

Specifically Indians and Chinese are over-represented, at least in my experience. This definitely appears to be a cultural thing as parents really push their children to pursue jobs in these fields.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261905)

I'm sure there are plenty of studies indicating that people who can't spell women are probably not qualified for much though.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261955)

If wimmin and minorities were motivated and qualified, they would have no problem getting jobs. These companies are tripping over themselves in their rush for diversity. Are they really going to pass on good candidates that help meet those goals?

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261977)

Can you provide some evidence for the contrary?

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about a month ago | (#47261985)

Can you provide some evidence that the wimmin and minorities are neither motivated nor qualified?

Wait, are you one of the "wimmin" spelling women? For some reason, I can't get into this at all. True, I'm a dude, but it's somewhere more annoying than nails on a chalkboard, and almost as annoying as enormous ear gauges. Like, "yay, we can spell 'women' without 'men' now!" No, not.

P.S. I also consider myself a feminist.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about a month ago | (#47262091)

I likes to go swimmin with bow legged wimmin.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (0)

u38cg (607297) | about a month ago | (#47262179)

No. The point of it is a dig against those who like to treat women as a single homogeneous group with identical thoughts and opinions. Given that man and woman have different etymologies (really) it's a fairly daft idea.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (1)

GoCrazy (1608235) | about a month ago | (#47262167)

I know I can't for minorities, especially since despite making up 6% of the US population, Asian Americans make up 30% of Google's employees. And that despite making up 71% of the US population, "whites" only make up 61% of Google's employees. In general STEM fields, Asian Americans make up 15% while whites make up 70%.

My conclusion is that certain races are attracted to different fields, Asians moreso to tech, whites are neutral, and other races less so to tech, and that passion contributes to their qualifications. My social commentary is that judging a field by their attractiveness to certain races trivializes the effort those workers put in to go into that line of work, when social pressure prioritizes an innate and unchangeable trait over life choices.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (1)

bberens (965711) | about a month ago | (#47262169)

I'm not OP, but I'd be happy to. According to this site: http://www.ngcproject.org/stat... [ngcproject.org] only 18% of computer science grads are women in the US. That means Yahoo has women over-represented and Google is about right. You can't blame Yahoo, Google, et al for the market of candidates being mostly men. The problems that cause that exist far before Yahoo or Google might be involved. Talk to primary educators, parents, etc.

Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (4, Insightful)

MRe_nl (306212) | about a month ago | (#47262009)

The problem is that most of the factors in achieving and maintaining qualification and motivation, after lots of research, appear to be societal and economical. Therefore we are not getting the most qualified and motivated but a small sub-set of that group (white males) and standards could be raised if we could choose from a larger set. "Carve out your own space and get hired" is simply a gross over-simplification of the situation. Lack in basic nutrition, healthcare, education, credit, role-models and many other factors and their interplay might be a factor perhaps?

Re: Most qualified and motivated candidates? (0)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about a month ago | (#47262147)

Which here would indicate that women are either significantly more tech capable, or their is signifigant favoritism coming on. What is there like 5% women in the tech industry? So why are Google and yahoo hireing so much above the countries/worlds average?

The rest of the tech industry must be a pure sausage fest, because these numberes make it look they have hired every woman who even just took cs in highschool.

Sensationalist summary (5, Insightful)

brunes69 (86786) | about a month ago | (#47261727)

The charts released by Yahoo indicate women fare worse in its global tech workforce...

They indicate nothing of the sort. They indicate that Yahoo has fewer female workers than male workers. That is it.

Insinuating that female workers "fare worse" at Yahoo is akin to insinuating that there is rampant sexism and a glass ceiling going on there, which is most likely simply untrue. The truth is that there are simply fewer females applying for positions because there are fewer female CS graduates, which is the ACTUAL fact.

If you want more women in the tech workforce, you need to start at the source and graduate more first.

The same thing can be said of blacks. Like it or not the amount of black CS engineers in Silicon Valley is very, very small. You can't artificially create diversity when none exists in the talent pool.

Re:Sensationalist summary (1, Interesting)

war4peace (1628283) | about a month ago | (#47261773)

The IT company I work for is full of young, attractive women. They do a very good job in certain areas, such as handling financial contracts, customer calls, renewals, etc.
Strictly from a development perspective, they simply might not be attracted/interested by that work type, although I personally knew a couple excellent female developers who work nearby.

Re:Sensationalist summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261941)

Meanwhile you will never realize that you are part of the problem. Subconsciously part of it, but part of the problem nonetheless.

Why did you need to remark on the attractiveness of the women? What bearing does their appearance have on their competence or just in being women?

If these were guys you were talking about, appearance never would have factored into your remark. Note I said "appearance", not "your level of attraction."

The rest of your comment is equally tone deaf, but I honestly don't have the time.

Re:Sensationalist summary (0)

Jody Bruchon (3404363) | about a month ago | (#47262017)

Ah yes, let's semantically slice the fuck out of every last thing that someone else says that we dislike to further our anti-male sexist agenda. That ALWAYS makes us appear intellectually superior and exposes that evil patriarchy shit that we blame everything on because we're too busy trying to feel like we're making society better to make an actual effort to succeed in the workplace.

Then we get the "reading comprehension" bullshit that feminazis love to fall back on. There's no substance in anything you say. GTFO troll.

Re:Sensationalist summary (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47262185)

He wouldn't have commented the attractiveness, if he is male and straight. Conversely, women tend to comment attractivness of other males, including collegues. Nobody ever complained.
 
What's news here? Heterosexual people often notice attractivness of people of the other sex. Homosexuals notice attractivness of people of the same sex. Some (all?) women have a tendency to also recognize attractiveness of other women. What is sexist or wrong about that?

Re:Sensationalist summary (2)

Calydor (739835) | about a month ago | (#47262205)

"The IT company I work for is full of young, sporty guys."

There, a similar statement going on the most common stereotype for men - that only geeks work with computers. The GP's post likely meant that despite these women having the looks 'necessary' to just sit at home while their husband earns all the money they have chosen to go into the IT field. It's a stereotype BREAKER, not a stereotype ENFORCER.

Re:Sensationalist summary (0)

u38cg (607297) | about a month ago | (#47261823)

Given that the Yahoos of this world have the pick of the graduate pool (and they don't just hire CS graduates) I'd say that might not be the only thing going on here.

Re:Sensationalist summary (4, Informative)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a month ago | (#47261895)

According to this page: http://www.economicmodeling.co... [economicmodeling.com]
At the very best, females make up 30.4% of IT graduates.
The workforce is 35% female, so on average females are more likely to be hired for IT positions than men.

Re:Sensationalist summary (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about a month ago | (#47261917)

Insinuating that female workers "fare worse" at Yahoo is akin to insinuating that there is rampant sexism and a glass ceiling going on there, which is most likely simply untrue.

It's a little difficult to believe there is a "glass ceiling" at Yahoo considering Marissa Mayer is in the highest position in the company. I'm pretty sure she's a woman, and there is no single position within the company over the CEO.

Re:Sensationalist summary (3, Insightful)

arth1 (260657) | about a month ago | (#47262053)

It's a little difficult to believe there is a "glass ceiling" at Yahoo considering Marissa Mayer is in the highest position in the company. I'm pretty sure she's a woman, and there is no single position within the company over the CEO.

The board of directors might disagree.

Anyhow, it appears that Yahoo has a higher ratio of female to male IT workers than what the schools produce, which tells me men have a harder time finding a job there than women do.

Re:Sensationalist summary (2)

sribe (304414) | about a month ago | (#47262051)

Insinuating that female workers "fare worse" at Yahoo is akin to insinuating that there is rampant sexism and a glass ceiling going on there, which is most likely simply untrue.

Rampant sexism we don't actually know about, but there sure as shit is no "glass ceiling" at Yahoo ;-)

We tumblr now. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261733)

When did /. become SJW Central?

Re: We tumblr now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261981)

Didn't you know that the tech industry, with its billions of dollars of wealth, is the next big ripe target for self-appointed social engineers to tell us how the world should be ...

Re:We tumblr now. (1)

Jody Bruchon (3404363) | about a month ago | (#47262095)

I love how you said "We Tumblr now" because this is all I hear when the SJWs turn up and preach: http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/... [knowyourmeme.com]

Apples vs Oranges (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261737)

Wouldn't it be more accurate to take the top 15% of students in the majors and from the schools they hired from, then compare against the percentage of ethnicity and gender of who they hired? I think the numbers would be much more interesting then (at least from my experiences).

skill is no longer a valid factor (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261739)

Sad when one has to look at the color of someone's skin to make a hiring decision. Personally I'd rather hire the best candidate.

Availablility (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261743)

We desperately want to hire people who are qualified. About half the the people we interviewed were either South or East Asian. One was African American, and she didn't know what multi-threaded processing was.

Re:Availablility (1)

Entropius (188861) | about a month ago | (#47262155)

How do you not know that when cellphones these days are advertised as having quad-core processors?

Just Maybe... (5, Insightful)

KermodeBear (738243) | about a month ago | (#47261745)

Just maybe this has nothing to do with race or sexism and they just hired the best people they could find.

Like a lot of people at Slashdot, I work in the IT industry too. Most of our people are male, and either Caucasian or Indian. Does that mean that the company I work for is part of some evil conspiracy to keep aphroditic purple martians out of the IT work force? Nope. We'd hire my dog if she was good at what needed to be done. Nobody cares what your body looks like as long as you're Nice and Competent. We simply don't get a lot of female, Chinese, Norwegian, Mexican, Brazilian, etc., people applying.

Is that a problem? I don't think so. Maybe certain demographics - gasp - have a majority of their interests in other areas. There's far more female nurses in hospitals than male nurses and although I see it mentioned from time to time, I never see hospitals being excoriated and dragged over the coals because they don't have a 50% male nursing force. Basketball is dominated by people with dark skin and I don't see people complaining that the white guys are under-represented.

This isn't any different. The opportunities are there. The education is available. Maybe certain demographics just aren't as interested in IT.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

Re:Just Maybe... (3, Funny)

NEDHead (1651195) | about a month ago | (#47261801)

Most basketball players are tall also, which suggests a body image crisis in that industry.

Re:Just Maybe... (1)

u38cg (607297) | about a month ago | (#47261919)

Does your company actually track applicants through to hiring to actually prove that women don't apply? Or is this something you just tell yourself to make y'all feel better?

Re:Just Maybe... (2)

Wycliffe (116160) | about a month ago | (#47262157)

Does your company actually track applicants through to hiring to actually prove that women don't apply? Or is this something you just tell yourself to make y'all feel better?

So are you implying that HR (which is many times heavily female) is intentionally dropping qualified female applicants based on race?
I highly doubt this. We don't have an HR department so I see EVERY resume that applies to a position and 90% of them are male.
This article makes it sound like google and yahoo are descriminating against females when in reality they have a higher percentage
of female in their workforce than the percentage that are graduating from college with CS degrees which IMHO is pretty darn impressive.
If only 30% of the CS workforce is female and you hire 35% female then you are doing pretty good and it actually means that
some other company has to have less than 30% to make up for the extra females that you hired.
If you want more females (or blacks) at google or yahoo you need to start further up the chain. You have to get women actually
wanting to get CS degrees. I have many female(and male) relatives that have less than zero interest in programming and
you couldn't pay them enough to do my job.

Re:Just Maybe... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a month ago | (#47261953)

There's far more female nurses in hospitals than male nurses

There's plenty of opportunity for sexism before you even get to the hiring process. It's not necessarily the hospitals' fault, but it still affects the male-female balance in medicine [slate.com] .

Re:Just Maybe... (1)

internerdj (1319281) | about a month ago | (#47262055)

IT, at least if you listen to the media and the politicians, is currently one of the most important industries that the US has. While it may come down to preference, we don't want to have a culture that in some way discourages people who haven't historically had opportunity from one of the healthiest sectors of the economy. We have some pretty strong statistics that say something is going on here and that something is going on from middle school to end of career. What this means is we need to find out what is happening because we may be failing at even conservative ideas of equality: equal opportunity.

Seriously? This report is kinda stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261747)

They look for talented individuals in computer science. It's directly related to the diversity of computer science graduates and shouldn't be an indicator of a problem. The problem is hiring people for the color of their skin instead of their talent. If you want an indicator of a problem, then look at the applicants and their resumes along with their ethnicity and THEN maybe you might fight a problem.

Bad? (2)

neoform (551705) | about a month ago | (#47261749)

Someone want to explain to me how it's "bad" that they hired people they deemed qualified for the job?

Why would Google/Facebook/Yahoo or any other company be paying attention to the race, gender or religion when hiring? Doing so would be prejudicial...

Re:Bad? (1)

mnooning (759721) | about a month ago | (#47261873)

My 15 year old niece wants to be a stay at home mom, just like millions of other women and girls. Add to that the many moms who are working outside of the home purely out of necessity. Stay at home moms are important, too.

Re:Bad? (1)

Entropius (188861) | about a month ago | (#47261913)

It's only prejudice if it comes at the expense of the wrong groups, don'tcha know?

Tag suggestion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261753)

Tag: whofuckingcares

Tag suggestion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261901)

I do, because I want to see some nice ass and tits while working ;)

What do you expect? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261755)

These companies are made up primarily of software engineers and software engineers are predominately male. How are you supposed to hire more women when the available pool is so small?

Again, we go here. (1)

rmdingler (1955220) | about a month ago | (#47261775)

If the most enlightened work places in the World are unable to diversify enough to satisfy the politically correct mob,

is it not feasible quality candidates are unavailable in every spectrum?

Everyone's special snowflake isn't qualified for every job in the market.

Re:Again, we go here. (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a month ago | (#47261863)

Most enlightened? Hahaha, Silly Valley employers are among the most discriminatory in the world! You just didn't notice because of the trendy offices and hipster glasses. They've created perfect '50s-style silent oppression in the HR department, as you have demonstrated.

Re:Again, we go here. (2)

Xest (935314) | about a month ago | (#47262181)

I'm intrigued, care to elaborate?

From what I've seen they seem to be some of the few companies willing to actively campaign for gay rights equality and so forth for example and they don't seem to have any qualms hiring people from different ethnicities overseas, and in fact have been campaigning for more.

Is your suggestion that because the numbers aren't 50/50 that they're obviously discriminatory or something?

We try (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261781)

I work at a fairly large tech company. We try to hire with diversity in mind, but there just are not many applicants. The change had to start at the education level. BTW, just we hire someone that meets the checkbox for "diverse", they still are highly qualified. The misnomer is that hiring with diversity somehow implies a lower quality candidate. That is not true.

is this like where they count Asians as White? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261793)

like they apparently did for the analysis of Google?

Equally Divided! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261795)

Here is a shocker maybe not enough women want to work in the Tech field? My wife thinks my job sounds horrible and she has no desire to bang away on a computer and thinks I'm crazy for doing it. Everyone seems to think everyone in the world is just like them and since they want to work in a field where you have very little interpersonal interaction that everyone would flock to that job. The same way I don't see a whole lot of men lining up to be elementary school teachers workers women as a whole don't seem as interested in working in the computer field as men. Can't men and women be different or does society now say all jobs must have break downs of people equal to the same population break down. Why can't we just say 100% of the people in working in tech companies are people and not say Women, Men, Asian, Black, White, Hispanic. Why can't we stop dividing people and treat them based on the individual qualities? If you want to work in tech great! if you don't great!

High tech jobs aren't the best job ever for everyone so lets stop the false outrage that this particular line of work does not have equal population distribution unless we are going to do that for all jobs. Where is the outrage of HR professionals, teachers, carpenters or any other job category.

Re:Equally Divided! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261967)

Well said, especially the comment about teachers.

Often you hear the drum about "not enough women in technology" but rarely about how there are not enough male teachers.

I'm a "technology" kind of guy as well and my wife doesn't understand it. She couldn't care less about technology, as long as she can read the news on the internet once in a while she is good.

Not sure why we keep trying to "push" people into careers they may not be interested in. Usually it is for the "politically correct" goal of "equality" which itself is sort of a one-way street (little push for male nurses or teachers which are female dominated fields).

Some women are into technology, but most are not and that is completely fine.

Unemployment (2)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a month ago | (#47261799)

How about unemployment rates for female and black tech workers?
Given the outrage I would expect atleast 35% of the unemployed tech workers being female and atleast 1% being black,.

Oops. Yahoo didnt give overall U.S. gender #'s (1)

theodp (442580) | about a month ago | (#47261803)

Should be "with a global overall workforce that's 37% female and U.S. tech workforce that's 1% Black."

I have a dream... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261811)

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. "

Oh well... I guess my children and their character can't make it on their own. All our hiring managers at the most liberal companies in America must be racist, so screw qualifications, competency, and competition. Let's judge them on the color of their skin so appearances are good and we feel good about ourselves. That won't have any negative implications (like overall productivity, competency, resentment to minorities from "less preferred" races, resentment from qualified "preferred" races for condescension of the process). Why, it's Utopia!

How to interpret the statistics (1)

kurisuto (165784) | about a month ago | (#47261819)

The numbers might give the impression that Google and Yahoo are unfairly discriminating against blacks and women. To determine whether that's the case, I think you need to know two things:

--Among Google and Yahoo employees, what percentage are black? What percentage are women?
--Among CS graduates, what percentage are black? What percentage are women?

(I'm simplifying here by assuming that every hire at Google and Yahoo is a CS graduate.)

If the two sets of numbers differ significantly, then it could indicate discriminatory hiring practices. If the numbers are the same, then it would seem to indicate that Google and Yahoo are evenhandedly hiring from the pool of available candidates, and that the cause of the inequality is further upstream.

Re:How to interpret the statistics (3, Insightful)

neoform (551705) | about a month ago | (#47261843)

Graduation rates do not indicate talent, skill or grades.

Merely passing a course with a D average does not entitle you to a job at the biggest and most sought after IT companies in the world.

Re:How to interpret the statistics (1)

kurisuto (165784) | about a month ago | (#47261993)

True, but the null hypothesis is that men and women are equally capable at CS, however you measure that. Likewise with whites and blacks. Unless there's data to indicate otherwise, I'm assuming that knowing somebody's race or sex doesn't tell you anything about how likely they are to be good at CS.

Oh, the humanity! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261825)

As a white male, I am flagellating myself mercilessly to atone for my race's crimes.

Re:Oh, the humanity! (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about a month ago | (#47262213)

As a white male, I am flagellating myself mercilessly to atone for my race's crimes.

You'r human. I hope you give yourself a good flogging for a few more too

Diversity in every work place (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261829)

I'd like to see diversity in every workplace including professional sports. Now, diversity in some sports would mean white guys must be hired to play.

Sexism (5, Insightful)

MikeRT (947531) | about a month ago | (#47261831)

Men, particularly blue collar men, have been disproportionately impacted by the bad economy. Where is the same level of enthusiasm about training blue collar men for an "exciting career as a nurse, nurse practitioner, etc.?" Those are high paying, skilled, wildly disproportionately female-dominated positions. They could easily accommodate an influx of men. There is also a true shortage of qualified people, unlike in computer-related fields. Why no interest? Because if we suddenly gave men the opportunity and incentive (ex aggressive recruiting, preferential college admission, etc. ) to pursue those fields, a lot of women might be pushed out and that'd be "sexist."

Facts vs Stereotypes (1)

Jeremy Gillespie (3664681) | about a month ago | (#47261833)

Can anyone please go to any college university and look at the class make up in a well balanced school and report back what THAT looks like, then compare it to what is in the work force? I'm sure even requesting data from staffing agencies, who house probably more resumes than anyone else, would yield the best unbiased results of people seeking employment. Since all the white males are -clearly- employed then they should have a minority in something like a recruiter's pool of applicants. Right?...right?!...Come on now... We all know the real answers to these questions and we are all afraid to say it. Lets be honest. Most African Americans and women don't care about IT. You could trace it with scientific "data" and say some left brained/right brained has something to do with it, or you could just say its not a 'cool field' for most people. I work in a nerdy industry, and I'm proud as hell of it. Most people aren't ok saying that.

Re:Facts vs Stereotypes (1)

parkinglot777 (2563877) | about a month ago | (#47262031)

When I went to college here (10 years ago), there were about 30% or less women in most CS classes. No black woman. A few black men. A few hispanic. Almost half and half Asians and Whites. When I went back to college again for graduate (about 7 years ago), there were one or two women in classes. Most of those women who were in class were Indian. I saw similar number of Asians and Whites. Still no black woman. Still one or two black men. No hispanic...

Re:Facts vs Stereotypes (1)

Entropius (188861) | about a month ago | (#47262099)

I can give those answers for the computational physics classes I've taught and the physics departments I've seen.

At my previous university, located in the Southwest in a town that is ~40% Hispanic, the physics department student body was perhaps half whites. There were no African-Americans or immigrants from Africa, and some fraction (10%?) of Hispanics*. There were quite a few East Asian immigrants, some Indian immigrants, and some Indian-Americans. There were more immigrants among graduate students than among undergraduates; the only Africans were a few Afrikaaners.

Thinking back to the "best and brightest" students that came through my computational physics course, they were roughly evenly split between men and women; most were white, with two good Hispanic students. Anecdotally, astronomy has many more women than physics, and the course was also taken by astronomers.

At my current university, located in an urban area that is 50% black, there is one black student in the physics program proper: an Ethiopian immigrant. (She is excellent.) There are a small number of black students in service courses; anecdotally, they tend to do worse than their peers, with one notable exception who is strong. There are no New World Hispanics that I can think of; there are two Spaniards. The graduate program has a great many Chinese, some Indians, and some Ukrainians (from these countries), along with white Americans.

So, basically: the people in physics courses (at least) include very few blacks, some Hispanics in Hispanic areas, and whites and Asians, with more Asian immigrants in graduate programs.

Is this really worth looking at (1)

ZenMatrix (1299517) | about a month ago | (#47261841)

I understand "WHY" they look at these numbers, to make sure there is no unfair practices going that would limit someones chance to get a position at these companies, but trying to have been numbers does the same thing. No I don't have any supporting information, I just think its common sense if you hire based on the diversity numbers you denying someone else that opportunity as well. I don't know much about these studies, do they look at the area these companies are based on. While there probably a even mix of men an women, some areas would have an uneven mix of different races. I would like to see is if an area is 65% African American and a company only has 1% of its employees of that race. The other issue is colleges, what are the local colleges diversity numbers, and are they higher or lower then local companies.

When I was studying comp sci in uni... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261845)

......we where lucky to have 1 girl in the classroom.

Personally I find IT/Programming is just one of these fields that does not seem to appeal to women in general.

What is Google/Yahoo/Facebook supposed to do? Force them at gunpoint to work for them?

re: zuckerberg (1)

buddyglass (925859) | about a month ago | (#47261849)

He'll release the Facebook stats if and when there's a compelling profit motive to do so, and not a minute sooner. And I don't hold that against him one bit.

Its only career preferences that determine this (1)

Eravnrekaree (467752) | about a month ago | (#47261875)

I don't think that it has anything to do with sexism or anything else. There really is little or no employment discrimination going on. It is all based on who is skilled and qualified. I think it is due to the fact that certain demographic sections are just not as interested in IT work and they decide to go into another field. The only reason that we are seeing this pattern is because certain groups are more likely to decide one career path over another. And that is their right. So, why are we trying to force people into jobs they really don't want to do and don't like, and why do we keep trying to punish and slant things against the people who actually do like to do those jobs? A lot of women go into nursing, more than men. A lot of men go into IT. This is because of their own CHOICE and shouldnt it be? But you have people talking about how we need to force women into IT jobs when they are happier in a nursing job.

As well, "diversity" is a deceptive, and overused term. I strongly believe that the citizens of a country should have equal opportunity to pursue jobs they want to do. If a male wants to become a nurse, please do. If a female wants to do IT, please do. But dont do it because of all of this political correctness/diversity crap. But you have these "Diversity" people out there that dont believe in that, they want to force people into jobs they really do not like. Diversity for the sake of diversity is an absurd and ludicrous idea and I reject it.

Slippery slope. (1)

B33rNinj4 (666756) | about a month ago | (#47261883)

My company is pretty diverse, and we've been lucky to hire and retain quality people. However, we're small and relatively agile. Google and Yahoo are massive companies, and I'm afraid they will be too heavy-handed in their hiring, and just bring in "diversity" without verifying that they have the skills to do the job. It would be a disservice to those employees to inadvertently be set up for failure.

Oh, bullshit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261893)

I've been hiring and managing developers and sys admins for ~20 years. I'm a guy, but some of my best and most capable bosses have been women. If you're not finding talented women, it is because you're not looking. If you hire the best, you will naturally get a substantial number of women and people of all colors. The arguments about a lack of talent among women and people of color are just more bigoted bullshit.

I'm done with slashdot. The racism and sexism just get old and speak to the overwhelming number of privileged, unreflective mouth breathers in the IT community. There's no reason to read the material here, when I know the response is going to be regressive nonsense.

When making money... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261911)

Who gives a shit about diversity. When making money the motive is profit.

Who is best for the job is what matters.

Maybe the issue lies elsewhere, Notice I didn't say problem.

Maybe particular demographics have less interest or skills in certain fields and that is why they have a lower representation?
The diversity argument always implies discrimination via race or sex, but notice no-one ever mentions Asians who are well represented in IT and engineering.... though I do not see many Chinese/Japanese/Vietnamese bricklayers, is that a problem?
How are they doing per capita in each of these demographics?

Fuck this : "lets label someone a victim and create feel good bureaucratic nonsense"

Check your privilege (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261927)

As a multi-ethnic interracial black Asian American gender fluid bisexual animal rights activist, in a relationship with a Somali Swede albino agendered homosexual with autism, I find it unacceptable that our particular cases are always ignored when talking about those matters. My partner always it had it worse. Won't someone please think of the Somali albinos?

Sports Teams not diversified (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261939)

I think it is time for the NBA and NFL to work on their diversity.

NBA: 76.3% black players (2013)
NFL: 67% black players (2010)

How come no one is up in arms about this?

Where are all the Japanese, Mexican, Indian players?
Well, where are the FEMALE players in the NBA or NFL?

This is an outrage.

Diversity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261965)

These are tech companies. They need to function. So they need the people who can actually do the required work, at least to some degree.

It's not the same as some federal office department, where it doesn't really make any difference if somebody is working or not.

So Asians are considered white people? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47261991)

40% of Yahoo employees are Asian. If anything having Asian employees should be considered more diversified than even blacks, considering that many come from a totally different culture, and often speak different languages.

Re:So Asians are considered white people? (1)

Andover Chick (1859494) | about a month ago | (#47262197)

The Asian mix shows wonderful diversity. In fact, Asians and folks of Northern European descent get along wonderfully as witnessed by the large amount of inter marriage. About 75% of my white friends got married to Indians, Chinese, Koreans, etc. But yet no one wants to get involved with the African-Americans. The African-American neighborhoods are terribly dangerous, the kids get involved with guns & gang activity young, and they've got constant animosity with teachers and police.

We don't care anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47262001)

Seriously, this diversity issue is getting out of control everywhere. Hell, even in the NBA finals this year one of the announcers said something to the effect of "One of the reasons why the Spurs won this year is because of the team's diversity". Um, really? Like maybe they had a combination of the best players, best coaches, received less injuries, and played well together more so than any other team? Nope, it's because Miami had too many black guys on their team. This coming after the whole Sterling incident is just hilarious. Eg, it's bad when a white guy says something racially offensive, but ok when a minority does as long as it promotes DIVERSITY!!!!

ratios of suitable job applications (1)

JustNiz (692889) | about a month ago | (#47262005)

This is meaningless without knowing the gender/race ratios of suitable job applications.

Although I have no evidence to prove this, from my own long experience in the software industry I strongly suspect that high tech companies are actually NOT giving people a harder time getting in the door because of their ethnicity or gender. I am far more inclined to believe that the numbers of different groups actually employed more closely reflect the ratios of suitable job applications received in the first place.

If this is the case then the current balance is and should be seen as completely OK.

If qualified women and black people just aren't applying in as great a number as white males, the worst thing companies can do is artificially bump up their numbers by giving them an artificial advantage in the interview/selection process. Positive discrimination is still discrimination, just against someone that blind societal convention rather than actual fairness makes OK.

As a woman I know most women don't like math (4, Insightful)

Andover Chick (1859494) | about a month ago | (#47262015)

Sadly, as a woman who was strong in math throughout school, I know most women don't like math, engineering, or even working in the corporate world. It is all very well and good to pick out a few of Silicon Valley's richest firms and then criticize them for not employing enough females. But the more important question is why don't girls go into math/engineering majors in college? It is a load of crap to say the girls don't have enough encouragement to go into the sciences. Fact is many girls like literature, the arts, and humanities because those majors are fun. Girls also like degrees which lead to education and caring for others (i.e. healthcare), that siphons off even more intelligent females. Fact is rooms full of nerdy computer science guys would love a few more women in their midst so I seriously doubt Google/Yahoo/Facebook are discriminating.

Re:As a woman I know most women don't like math (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a month ago | (#47262087)

We need to clone you ma'am, with your permission of course.

"opportunities" (4, Insightful)

OpenYourEyes (563714) | about a month ago | (#47262073)

I find the last line in the summary pretty... odd. Both Yahoo and Google in their reports make it pretty clear that there are plenty of opportunities for anyone who is interested in working for them. This isn't about opportunity - it's about outcome. In the interview that Google's Laszlo Bock did with PBS (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/googles-diversity-record-shows-women-minorities-left-behind/) he cites the example of hiring 50% of the Black CS PhD graduates in one year - one person. Both companies, and many more in the industry, are trying to fix the problem at where they see the source is - candidates not going into the programs that feed into the industry.

Lack of diversity (1)

sls1j (580823) | about a month ago | (#47262081)

I'll bet 100% of their employees are human, I mean shouldn't they be hiring monkeys, and parrots too. Talk about bigotry. They must be Animalphobic.

Redirected Blame (1)

bchat (267083) | about a month ago | (#47262085)

Google and Yahoo can only hire from the available, qualified workforce. Anyone who has been through a degree in Computer Science knows that very few women choose that career path. It's not Google or Yahoo's fault that women don't choose computer careers. I know women who have chosen an IT career path and they are just as competent as the men. Personally, I gladly welcome more women to go into IT and become qualified. But, most women seem to think that IT is too geeky for them. People who write these articles completely miss the real facts. They spread more misinformation and become part of the problem rather than the solution.

It's starting to get really frustrating (1)

kick6 (1081615) | about a month ago | (#47262115)

That companies are now eschewing profits in favor of pushing diversity. How and why investors/stockholders are pushing for this stuff is beyond me. It does not positively impact the bottom line, and that's all they SHOULD care about. Activist investors looking to make companies waste money on social crusades need to give up.

What industry has perfect demographic mirroring? (1)

swb (14022) | about a month ago | (#47262131)

Is there any business or industry that has some kind of perfect mirroring of the broader ethnic and gender demographics between their own population and society at large -- and whose mirror is the same up and down the pay scale (ie, I wouldn't call some some factory with a big majority of blacks or hispanics on the factory floor and all white men in the office a good example)?

"Who cares about diversity?" (3, Interesting)

OpenYourEyes (563714) | about a month ago | (#47262141)

Several posts have said, essentially, "shouldn't you hire the best person for the job, ignoring everything else?"

Thats what both Yahoo and Google are saying about why they want to hire a diverse workforce. Both of them realize that their clients and customers are a very diverse group of people, and they hope that by hiring a diverse group as well, they can better create products to meet a diverse set of needs. You can argue that gender and skin color still aren't great ways to find a diverse set of perspectives, and you'd be right, but its one small tool in the arsenal.

You could argue that whites are under-represented (2)

Chrisq (894406) | about a month ago | (#47262145)

Given that 39% of the US personnel are Asian and only 4.9% of the population, whites are under-represented. Of course this shows how silly the claim that the "diversity is flawed" are - the number of employees reflect the number of qualified applicants

Facepalm (1)

tom229 (1640685) | about a month ago | (#47262209)

My god this shit needs to stop. Affirmative action is just as ridiculous and hypocritical today as it was the day it was suggested. There is nothing to see here - Yahoo has a female CEO for crying out loud.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...