Slashdot Mirror
Silicon Valley Tech Workforce Is Vastly Different From US, Say Feds (computerworld.com)
Reader dcblogs shares an article on Computer World: In recent years, major high-tech firms have started releasing workforce diversity data, along with a promise to improve. And there is much room for improvement, according to federal officials. Among the top 75 Silicon Valley tech firms, whites make up 47% of the workforce, Asian Americans 41%, Hispanics, 6% and African Americans 3%, according to an analysis by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Women account for 30% of the workforce at these 75 firms. The diversity makeup of these Silicon Valley high-tech firms is very different from the national employment picture. When compared to overall private industry employment, the tech sector nationally -- not just Silicon Valley -- employed a larger share of whites (63% to 68%), as well as a larger share of Asian Americans (6% to 14%) and a smaller share of African Americans (14% to 7%) and Hispanics (14% to 8%). Employers with a workforce greater than 100 file reports to the EEOC about their employees' race, color, gender and national origin. Nationally, 64% of the employees in high-tech are men versus 52% in the broader workforce. Women account for 36% of the tech workforce, versus comprising 48% of the broader workforce.
So, my takeaway from this is that Indians (i.e. from the subcontinent, not the reservation) self-report as white.
In other findings, federal officials say that the IQ level of Silicon Valley workers is significantly higher than employees in the rest of the country. "We cannot determine the reasons for that, and are continuing our studies to determine the root cause", said one spokesman.
I do not find the racial and sex mixture for Silicone Valley to be odd considering the following factors. I am not saying these are good things, but they are the big influences IMO:
1) Privilege and Opportunity - It has been my experience that many of these people either grew up in a solidly middle class or upper middle class environment. A good education was available for them from birth, right through to university. This education makes a big difference.
2) Birds of a Feather Flock Together - People often associate themselves with others who are like-minded, and similar in a number of characteristics. This could even include race.
3) Females & Sciences - Women in general are under-represented in the sciences, especially within IT. IT has built itself a nice little sausagefest.
Having noted all of the above, SV is getting more diverse now by giving the high paying jobs to people with H1B Visas. I am not so sure this is a good thing. It would be awesome if the USA can get more opportunities for its current population.
Why is this news? There's only a conspiracy if the ratio of applicants' races differs greatly to those hired, and if there is proof that high quality applicants were turned away. Maybe African Americans and Hispanics just don't want to work 16 hour days with an expensive mortgage to cover.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
If you look only at 2nd-generation-or-more Americans (those whose parents were born and raised in America), parental education probably accounts for most of the difference for Whites, African-Americans, and Hispanics.
High-tech is typically skewed towards the highly-trained, which is correlated with parents who value education.
Among those whose parents aren't immigrants, having parents who value education is correlated to having educated parents. Having educated parents is also correlated to growing up in a middle-class-or-higher household.
Thanks to American's sad history of racial discrimination, having educated parents is also highly correlated to being non-Hispanic white and negatively correlated with being anything else, at least with respect to people whose parents were raised in the United States.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
"Anything else" primarily means African-American and Hispanic.
I don't have enough information about people with Asian, Indian-sub-continent, Middle East, Native American, or other backgrounds and whose parents grew up in the United States to know if there is a negative, or for that matter, positive correlation.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I guess we need more Asians in the national employment picture to bring them up to the level of Silicon Valley.
Sure, the Silicon Valley tech companies could do better to match the national diversity average of some of the demographics, but that's possibly irrelevant. What's missing, as is all too often the case in diversity stats, is the breakdown of the locally available workforce that is qualified to actually do the jobs in question. If the qualified employment pool simply isn't there then there's not a lot else they can do except employ lesser qualified people to make up the numbers for the diversity figures rather than just going on merit, which just serves to generate resentment, reduces productivity, and potentially risks an entire demographic being stereotyped as illsuited for the job in question.
Or bring up the diversity numbers through staff brought in from the necessary demographics via H1-Bs, of course.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Why? Do more women and minorities want to work in tech, while simultaneously having the discipline and training to get there?
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
On what grounds? Are you encountering problems that you believe a woman or minority would be better equipped to solve? Further, why do people like you see it fit to drive women and minorities? By the way, you say you're "in tech." What do you do? So many questions, AC. So many questions.
These numbers are effectively arbitrary, especially without knowing about the demographics, skills, certifications, qualifications, etc., of the applicants.
Articles such as this suggest a lot of things in a very hypocritical manner, or are at least exceedingly one-sided in scope. The author is jumping to conclusions without having any data to back it up.
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
Women are definitely underrepresented. But if the article's numbers are accurate; 47% white with the remainder consisting of minorities is within a reasonable margin to the demographics of the community.
http://www.bayareacensus.ca.go...
As of the 2010 census, whites make up 52.5% of the Bay Area's population, with the remainder again consisting of various minorities. A 5.5% discrepancy is not unreasonable, and quite possibly within the combined margin of error of the census and the study. Asians appear to be somewhat overrepresented, but I would guess that would come from the Indian-American population self-reporting as Asian.
Imagine all the people...
Just about any industry under the microscope is going to differ from the mean - especially if it is a small, isolated sample. Silicon Valley is one area of one part of the country in one industry. SURPRISE!
...culture does.
Until people start rejecting thug culture, or barrio culture, and start embracing "white" or "asian" culture, with proper english, a commitment to academics, and a disavowal of violence and misogyny, they're not going to get into the well paying tech jobs.
People in Silicon Valley are far less bigoted about sexual orientation than most other people. However, there aren't nearly enough women and minorities there.
It sounds like you are inferring that women and minorities are more bigoted about sexual orientation.
Does it matter there are almost no blacks or hispanics in IT? Does it really matter? Honestly? No, it doesn't. This smacks of leftist BS. I've been in IT across three decades, and I'm perfectly happy with the whites and asians I work with, and the fact that there are zero women in my department. Thankfully. No walking on PC eggshells.
Americans of Asian descent were very badly treated in the past. For a good example, read Robert Louis Stevenson's "Across the Plains", published in 1892.
"Despised Races
Of all stupid ill-feelings, the sentiment of my fellow Caucasians towards our companions in the Chinese car was the most stupid and the worst. They seemed never to have looked at them, listened to them, or thought of them, but hated them a priori. The Mongols were their enemies in that cruel and treacherous battle-field of money. They could work better and cheaper in half a hundred industries, and hence there was no calumny too idle for the Caucasians to repeat, and even to believe. They declared them hideous vermin, and affected a kind of choking in the throat when they beheld them. Now, as a matter of fact, the young Chinese man is so like a large class of European women, that on raising my head and suddenly catching sight of one at a considerable distance, I have for an instant been deceived by the resemblance. I do not say it is the most attractive class of our women, but for all that many a manâ(TM)s wife is less pleasantly favoured. Again, my emigrants declared that the Chinese were dirty. I cannot say they were clean, for that was impossible upon the journey; but in their efforts after cleanliness they put the rest of us to shame. We all pigged and stewed in one infamy, wet our hands and faces for half a minute daily on the platform, and were unashamed. But the Chinese never lost an opportunity, and you would see them washing their feetâ"an act not dreamed of among ourselvesâ"and going as far as decency permitted to wash their whole bodies. I may remark by the way that the dirtier people are in their persons the more delicate is their sense of modesty. A clean man strips in a crowded boathouse; but he who is unwashed slinks in and out of bed without uncovering an inch of skin. Lastly, these very foul and malodorous Caucasians entertained the surprising illusion that it was the Chinese waggon, and that alone, which stank. I have said already that it was the exceptions and notably the freshest of the three.
These judgments are typical of the feeling in all Western America. The Chinese are considered stupid, because they are imperfectly acquainted with English. They are held to be base, because their dexterity and frugality enable them to underbid the lazy, luxurious Caucasian. They are said to be thieves; I am sure they have no monopoly of that. They are called cruel; the Anglo-Saxon and the cheerful Irishman may each reflect before he bears the accusation. I am told, again, that they are of the race of river pirates, and belong to the most despised and dangerous class in the Celestial Empire. But if this be so, what remarkable pirates have we here! and what must be the virtues, the industry, the education, and the intelligence of their superiors at home!
Awhile ago it was the Irish, now it is the Chinese that must go. Such is the cry. It seems, after all, that no country is bound to submit to immigration any more than to invasion; each is war to the knife, and resistance to either but legitimate defence. Yet we may regret the free tradition of the republic, which loved to depict herself with open arms, welcoming all unfortunates. And certainly, as a man who believes that he loves freedom, I may be excused some bitterness when I find her sacred name misused in the contention. It was but the other day that I heard a vulgar fellow in the Sand-lot, the popular tribune of San Francisco, roaring for arms and butchery. âoeAt the call of Abraham Lincoln,â said the orator, âoeye rose in the name of freedom to set free the negroes; can ye not rise and liberate yourselves from a few dirty Mongolians?â
For my own part, I could not look but with wonder and respect on the Chinese. Their forefathers watched the stars before mine had begun to keep pigs. Gun-powder and printing, which the other day we imitated, and a school of manners which we never had the delicacy so m
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
We only need more woman and minorities in tech if they want to be here. Or are you implying we should enslave enough black people to raise their presence from 3% to 14%? Or force women to sit in front of a computer the way 1950's housewives were forced into the kitchen until women make up an additional 18% of the tech workforce?
That just seems wrong to me.
Show me reports of minorities and women trying to work in tech and not being able to find jobs, enough of them to make up for the disparity; then I'll agree we need to hire more of them. Until then, I'll go on assuming that those who want to work in this field do work in this field, and I'll be fine with that as I'm, personally, against forcing people into positions.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
That many percentages raises alerts in my B.S.ometer
Percentages are a great way to hide data, and the truth.
Say there are a small handful of really large companies that have discriminatory hiring practices. While many of the others are more on par with the rest of the population. To say Silicon Valley Culture is out of step due to a few big bad Apples really messes things up.
What is the variance across companies. How are these distributed across all the companies? You know real analysis not just percentages.
Percentages are just so you can complain on a bumper sticker.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
It's not minorities. That's too broad a term. Clearly there are many minorities that are present or even overrepresented in silicon valley. Minorities and diversity are newspeak terms that only apply to African Americans and Hispanics. Get with the program.
This article is just a excuse so the fedora-neckbeard crowd can congratulate themselves for being better human beings than those diverse non tech workers.
Any story like this I pretty much ignore because of Simpson's Paradox.
You are a racist bigot when you assume the diversity hire *isn't* the best surgeon available.
Learn to love Alaska
How is this confusing? It said Asian American not Chinese American. India is part of Asia.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Question for you. When you go to have some surgery, do you insist on the best surgeon? Like, the best in the world. Or just they best in the country. Or that hospital.
And how do you determine the best? If it's the success/failure ratio (accounting for difficulty, medical history, complications etc), how do you intend for new surgeons to enter the field? Practice on other people before opening you?
Or is it really just a question of you needing some routine surgery and a competent, qualified doctor and support staff that your insurance is willing to pay for?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Moreover, who decided that "diversity" was a good thing in the private sector? It's one thing not to discriminate against ethnicity/gender/religion/etc, it's something else entirely to actively try to hire a more diverse workforce.
Besides, it's ludicrous to think that you have the monopoly on what "diversity" means. Do you look down on people with a corporate background in your hiring process for your startup? Do you make sure there's not an astrological sign that's underrepresented in your workforce? Do you have enough people that crumple toilet paper instead of folding it when they wipe their ass? What about vegans, or sedan vs coupe drivers, or dog vs cat people? Do you have a 50/50 split between liberals and conservatives? What about people with a unibrow? Do you have as many bronies as GI Janes? There's no end to this madness.
Hire the best people you can afford, that should be the driving factor, anything else is stupid.
lucm, indeed.
Just because someone works at a tech company doesn't mean they are doing tech related work. It's very contradictory that the media keeps pointing out how few women there are and making a fuss about it but then applauding the companies for trying to be more inclusive but ignoring the fact that the EEOC reports show that all the "women in tech" are actually "women in HR, middle management, and labor." The reports show that only 10-15% women are actually in any sort of tech related role at these companies.
I don't care if a gender likes a job or not but I'm sick of all the news that pretends to care just to get reactions.
This would change drastically id the US ever decided to enforce the letter of the H-1B law. As things are, they get no oversight and very little press, something Big Tech (fill in the names) have lobbied hard to maintain. Money talks.
Organization? You must be joking..
Well stated.
Furthermore, wouldn't it be considered discriminatory to hire a person to simply to fulfill a certain demographic quota, when there may be another, better-qualified individual applying for the same position at the same pay?
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
They should be forced to work there apparently.
Any non-(white straight male) is a "diversity hire" to anyone who would use the term "diversity hire", regardless of qualifications.
Learn to love Alaska
The best in the field is still considered a "diversity hire" by bigots.
Learn to love Alaska
When I went for the only elective surgery I had (the two emergency ones were done by the "best sugeon in the world", as he was the only surgeon in the room when I would otherwise have died), I shopped. The two most prolific surgeons in the state were well above the rest, with public records, and multiple patients of each that I knew personally. So I asked around, looked at their records, and didn't know the gender or race of either until after I made my selection. I ended up with the #2, because #1 was not practicing at the time I needed it, due to a DUI (license suspended until trial, probably re-instated after, but I didn't follow it closely). I didn't shop out of the state because insurance didn't pay for travel when a local option was available.
Learn to love Alaska
*rolling eyes* I have no idea what the submitter's implication is... IMO, there aren't enough highly skilled people period. That's why special talent is shipped in from all over the world to work here. No time for bigotry. Tech hires on merit. EEOC are the biggest trolls ever; every case they litigate is the flameyest mofo ever. If it's that bigoted then how did Tim Cook and Satya Nadella make it to CEO by climbing the ranks of these companies?
I live in Texas and Hispanics are NOT a minority.
"Diversity hire" isn't a "liberal" term. It's a Conservative term to oppress minorities, implying any employed minority is inferior to the Master Race.
Note that in this thread, the first to use "diversity hire" was a race-hater I was replying to. I didn't start using it, but used the same words as him to show it's a stupid term. Apparently you are liberal, as you are agreeing with someone that you imply is liberal (wherein both think the term is silly and shouldn't be used).
Learn to love Alaska
Wait... You picked the "best" based on some stats, without correcting for experience or the type of surgery, and based partially on anecdotes. And one of them was so irresponsible they were caught driving drunk. I think your method may be flawed.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It seems sooooo easy to screen job candidates based on qualifications that to hire based on other factors would be NOT in the best interest of the company. How about testing CURRENT employees for qualifications?! I have, MANY times, encountered personnel from a company I hired that are far under-qualified for the job they were supposed to be doing, and the 'diversity data' of these incompetents' do NOT jive with any numbers I see here. If you are NOT qualified, either GET qualified or find a more suitable job!
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
I identify as Anglo, not Caucasian.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
and based partially on anecdotes.
You know the plural of anecdote. Data. And I looked up the government statistics, not just the personal ones.
Learn to love Alaska
"[AA] required that government employers "not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin" and "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin"
US AA isn't the same as the "international" version that Wikipedia reports that doesn't agree with any laws or public statements.
I guess I use the correct government definition, and you prefer the non-official definition because it supports your bigotry.
Learn to love Alaska
Your post was a factless insult, in claiming my posts are devoid of logic. If that were true, you could point to the errors. But you didn't. Because there aren't any. Which is what really pisses you off.
Learn to love Alaska