Slashdot Mirror
Google Accused of 'Extreme' Gender Pay Discrimination By US Labor Department (theguardian.com)
The U.S. Department of Labor is accusing Google of discriminating against its female employees and violating federal employment laws with its salaries for women. "We found systemic compensation disparities against women pretty much across the entire workforce," Janette Wipper, a Department of Labor regional director, testified in court in San Francisco on Friday. The Guardian reports: Google strongly denied the accusations of inequities, claiming it did not have a gender pay gap. The allegations emerged at a hearing in federal court as part of a lawsuit the DoL filed against Google in January, seeking to compel the company to provide salary data and documents to the government. Google is a federal contractor, which means it is required to allow the DoL to inspect and copy records and information about its its compliance with equal opportunity laws. Last year, the department's office of federal contract compliance programs requested job and salary history for Google employees, along with names and contact information, as part of the compliance review. Google, however, repeatedly refused to hand over the data, which was a violation of its contractual obligations with the federal government, according to the DoL's lawsuit. Labor officials detailed the government's discrimination claims against Google at the Friday hearing while making the case for why the company should be forced to comply with the DoL's requests for documents. Wipper said the department found pay disparities in a 2015 snapshot of salaries and said officials needed earlier compensation data to evaluate the root of the problem and needed to be able to confidentially interview employees.
The allegations emerged at a hearing in federal court as part of a lawsuit the DoL filed against Google in January
The left is eating their own! Keep going, and we may yet find a Constitutional Republic under the bodies.
I get that depending on how you slice and dice the numbers there is anywhere from no pay gap to a full blown social crisis.
However, what I don't get is that while there is always ample representation of gender, race, and ethnicity, there never seems to be anything discussed about longevity in the workforce. Let me explain. If a man starts working right out of college and works continuously to the age of 50 he will have achieved a certain salary, depending upon his career and other factors. If a woman were to do the same I would expect that they would achieve to a comparable level. The same goes for minorities, both men and women. However, if a woman drops out of the fast lane at age 25 or 27 for 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, etc., to raise a family (by that I mean either stops working, goes part time, or chooses a different full-time job specifically for the added flexibility or other family-friendly benefits), then at age 50 she simply will not have the same level of experience.
Every time that I hear the gender pay gap brought up I have to wonder if the numbers being analyzed account for that situation. Now, some people advocate making it illegal to be stay at home mom. I don't think that is the right solution. Perhaps we need to encourage fathers to spend more time with their families and less time working.
Either way, boiling it down to a single number: 1) doesn't tell the whole story; and 2) does a disservice to those women who have made a conscious choice to prioritize family above work. My mother did that and I am very happy that she did.
This has got to be the worst, if not most idiotic, defense of discriminatory pay I have ever seen.
Please, go hang yourself.
P.S. You make slashdot comments garbage
You offer a man $70k and he says no, that's not enough. You offer a woman $70k and she agrees. That's not discrimination, that's women being unwise.
I see, you think it is 'evil' what Google is doing.
No, I think it is hypocritical. Google supports the political left which indeed demands pay equality. But like many liberal elites, the rules are for others, not for them.
My post was also satire for those coming from the left who equate those giving away free stuff and offering superficial nice words as the good people. Those who judge other by intentions rather than by results, intentions which can easily be a mask.
Some men do, but what you're seeing is the difference between anecdotes and statistics. Statistically, men are less likely to do those things than women. When looked at in the aggregate, this creates a bigger wage gap than would otherwise exist.
And the difference doesn't end there. You also have to factor in people choosing whether to ask for a promotion or not. Most people (men and women alike) assume that higher pay means greater demands on their time, and choose not to ask rather than take on the extra responsibility. Women are more likely to not ask, at least in aggregate, because they are statistically more likely to have greater outside responsibilities beyond work.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Everyone will choose the idiot over a disaster any day of the election cycle. Margaret Thatcher would have pwned Trump in every metric.
It has to be the *right* woman, not just the only one running.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Unequal results do not imply an unfair process exists. That is why suits like this are BS.
Nope, pretty much women tend to be more conformist on average, get along to go along (more oestrogen less testosterone) and thus take a lower wage. Men on the other hand on average are more competitive (more testosterone less oestrogen) and demand a higher wage.
There's more to it than that - women do the choosing in sexual selection. They set the criteria. Men compete with each other to meet that criteria. Men who aren't competitive don't reproduce.
Open Competitiveness is a characteristic required for men to pass on their genes, while it is not required for women to pass on their genes, hence the men who *don't* compete never reproduced and their strain passed out of our system well before we were fully human.
Women can fix this by changing their selection criteria en masse. As long as women only choose those men who can support themselves and others while men choose women with youth and beauty, the future will be still be filled with men who have to compete and women who don't.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
You want similar pay, you have to actually ask for it.
No you don't. If Google's hiring process results in equally qualified men and women being paid significantly and systematically differently, then it is illegal. They can't use the lame excuse that the qualified women "deserve" to be paid less because they are bad negotiators. Being a "good negotiator" is not relevant to being a qualified engineer. For large companies, the DOJ does not need to prove the hiring process is "unfair", they only need to show that the results of the process are unequal.
I think your last sentence is wrong. At least when it comes to employees, that a fair process exists is far, far more important than whatever the statistics afterwards say. If Google massaged the numbers to make them look equal, that would be giving off a false appearance - likewise, I don't know why we'd punish a company for not having more engineers of a certain ethnicity, assuming they can show their hiring process isn't biased. Otherwise you get shit like gender quotas or such, which while I realize some people view them as necessary, I see them as both discriminatory and likely to produce worse employees. Honestly, a level of separation between the department that processes and accepts resumes and the one that evaluates whether or not employees are qualified would be nice, although I bet most companies don't want to deal with the extra overhead. This way, the guy who makes the deciding decision sees only their qualifications / personal letters - nothing else such as their name, ethnicity, gender, or anything else that is irrelevant.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
Men get more money, and more women have access to a lifestyle in which they don't have to work at all, to which men have little access. I'm not saying it's fair; I'm saying it's all unfair, and both genders are maintaining this state of affairs together. With, by the way, a little help from biology. After a birth, men aren't physically debilitated. Only economically :) (like everyone else. god damn kids are expensive.)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It's illegal to negotiate your salary ? What if two people get hired for identical positions, with identical degrees and years of experience, but one of them turns out to be 10 times as productive as the other, and wants a bonus and a raise. What are you going to do ?
Its now unfair to reward good performance, irrespective of the employees ability to recognize their own value or their willingness to risk requesting an agreeable compensation.
"His name was James Damore."
Wage disparity would end almost overnight if we got rid of this ridiculous notion that wages should be a secret. If you knew what everyone else was being paid you'd immediately know if you were getting the short end of the stick. It would be obvious if there was any systemic bias in wages.
Really, why wouldn't you want your peers to know what you make? The only reasons I can only think of are, "I might be getting paid too little and they'd all think less of me if they knew", or "I might be getting paid too much and they'd take it away from me to make it fair".
Keeping it a secret only benefits unscrupulous employers. The ones who will give you a low starting offer and low raises on the grounds that you'll never really know how much better you could be doing if you went elsewhere.
Adam Ruins Everything - Why You Should Tell Coworkers Your Salary
Chelloveck
I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
There's a lot of things wrong with your statement:
1. The 'majority' of those votes weren't more than the margin of error.
2. The recounts that Jill Stein initiated became silent as soon as the recount was showing in Trumps favor.
3. The electoral college was created to prevent 'ivory towers' from dictating the vote over the rest of the nation.
4. The Internet and the 'social' media that exists there only accounts for a small percentage of the voting population and not representative of any demographic as a whole.
And honestly if you really want to end slavery then you need to join a military and fight Islam. They are the ones selling people *today*. It's Illegal in the 'Western' world and has been for generations. It's alive and well in the middle east.
Please get some perspective.
Our forefathers were far more educated and experienced in the ways of the world than all the young-adults in America today put together. When I was young and stupid I thought like you. Now that I have a family, job and certain responsibilities I see the wisdom that went into creating America. Without the revisionist history or the altruistic ideology that I learned doesn't work. You kids have some nice ideas, but you should spend more time off the Internet learning what makes people tick.
Good luck out there.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.