Slashdot Mirror


Report Shows Another Diversity Challenge: Retaining Employees (sfchronicle.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Women, blacks and Latinos are far more likely to quit jobs in tech than white or Asian men, according to a new report by the Kapor Center for Social Impact. The Oakland nonprofit commissioned an online survey by the Harris Poll, which asked 2,006 people who voluntarily left tech jobs in the past three years about why they quit. It found women were twice as likely to leave as men (alternative link), while black and Latino tech workers were 3.5 times likelier to quit than white or Asian colleagues. The most common reason they gave for their departures was workplace mistreatment.

26 of 296 comments (clear)

  1. "Diversity is a Strength!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe not. It sounds like a waste of resources.

    1. Re:"Diversity is a Strength!" by bluelip · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sounds like the study was flawed. I'm sure "I sucked at my job and decided to go elsewhere" wasn't an appealing reason for most to select.

      --

      Yep, I never spell check.
      More incorrect spellings can be found he
    2. Re:"Diversity is a Strength!" by SirSlud · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's like you just decided to do a little demo of the kind of quick to judge hostility they face.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re: "Diversity is a Strength!" by sethstorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except that SJW is accurate at describing the people defined by it. Same with those that virtue signal.

      Claims of overuse or "idiocy" affirm it while identifying the speakers ideological leanings.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    4. Re: "Diversity is a Strength!" by lucm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In this specific case, the poster simply said that some of the people who left their job maybe had other reasons than what the study is reporting. Someone accused that poster of showing the "quick to judge hostility" those people face. There was not even a hint of that in the actual comment; therefore, it qualifies as virtue signaling because essentially the person is taking the high road without justification.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
  2. AKA "snowflake syndrome" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let me guess, they were expected to be productive members of the team and not just the token minority, and that got to be too much for them, so they quit rather than be fired for incompetence.

    1. Re: AKA "snowflake syndrome" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That comment should be modded up. It's correct. It isn't nice to think about, but 'affirmative action' has put a lot of unqualified people into job positions they never deserved, never earned, and often do a horrible job at. This just generates resentment from the qualified people who lost out on the positions, and the co-workers who have to fix the unqualified employees' mistakes, and the customers who have to deal with awful service. Of course unqualified 'affirmative action' hires will feel some heat when everybody else knows all too well that these hires are way more of a burden than a benefit.

    2. Re: AKA "snowflake syndrome" by HornWumpus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Remember: Ego comes first.

      The unqualified never know that they are unqualified. It's just a bunch of meanies, picking on them.

      The worst thing that can happen to office morale is for an incompetent to be promoted and rewarded. I've seen it happen, it's the fastest way to wreck a working team.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:AKA "snowflake syndrome" by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or due to their minority status they found it easier to get another (better pay/conditions) job at another company who wanted to satisfy their diversity quota.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    4. Re:AKA "snowflake syndrome" by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Might I submit for your consideration that you "anonymous coward" might just be the kind of co-worker making people feel mistreated. Labeling people "snowflakes" doesn't exactly demonstrate empathy and solidarity.

      Even "good natured ribbing" can be cruel when the humor isn't shared.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    5. Re: AKA "snowflake syndrome" by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ego comes first...The unqualified never know that they are unqualified. It's just a bunch of meanies [to them], picking on them.

      Heaven forbid if we ever got a president like that.

    6. Re: AKA "snowflake syndrome" by Tanktalus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When an incompetent white guy gets a job nobody complains that he got it because he's a white guy. Funny how that works.

      Really? I see a lot of complaining about white guys getting jobs, whether they're competent at it or not, just because they're white. Funny how that works.

  3. Childbirth? by networkBoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know it doesn't account for all of it, but I've lost many female co-workers to motherhood and their decision to stay at home with their children.

    --
    whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    1. Re:Childbirth? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know it doesn't account for all of it, but I've lost many female co-workers to motherhood and their decision to stay at home with their children.

      But that has nothing to do with "tech". If that was the reason, then women would be more likely quit non-tech jobs as well. TFA doesn't address that ... because it is crap journalism written to push an agenda rather than present facts.

      In the broader economy, the progress of women from entry level jobs (where they represent 53%) to mid-level (37%) to senior (26%) is often referred to as a "leaky pipeline", with women more likely to quit at every level and in all industries. Is it worse in tech? I dunno. Some tech-specific numbers would be interesting.

  4. Perception is not Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When a White person (or an Asian) gets mistreated, then he just thinks "Man, people are assholes!"

    When a Black or Latino gets mistreated, then he thinks "Man, white people are assholes!"

    When a woman gets mistreated, then she thinks "Woman, men are assholes!"

    In my black, female opinion (I'm transgender and transracial): Only the Whites (and Asians) have the right understanding: People are assholes.

  5. Re:Company's Fault by bigman2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    White male here.

    Coincidentally, I left my last 2 jobs for the exact same reason (perceived mistreatment). I think it is a 'thing', and not just for protected classes.

    That's why people leave their jobs. Were they expecting to hear, "I just lost interest in my job?"

    No...people don't say that. They blame the job, and those assholes they left behind.

    --
    No reason to lie.
  6. The first question that comes to mind by taustin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    is "Are women and minorities mistreated more often, or are white men more tolerant of being mistreated?"

    Unfortunately, there's no possible way to ask that question that won't produce an hysterical, blind hatred response from pretty much everybody.

    1. Re:The first question that comes to mind by Pfhorrest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      An important corollary is that even if it is the latter, that doesn't automatically make the less-tolerant-of-mistreatment women and minorities at fault for anything. Just because one group of people are willing to put up with something doesn't make the something okay or another group somehow in the wrong for not putting up with it; maybe the people who put up with bad things don't have the balls to stand up for themselves and wrongly let themselves be pushed over. It's an open question where the line of "too sensitive" vs "not sensitive enough" is, and not an open-and-shut case that more sensitive is bad, no matter how much people who want you to put up with their shit may tell you it is.

      Consider the oft-cited fact(?) that men are tougher salary negotiators. Does that make them "less tolerant of low pay", or "more sensitive about their pay", and is that then a fault? Should we be saying "poor little babies whine for more money and won't just suck it up and accept what they're offered", instead of praising them for confidence and boldness?

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    2. Re:The first question that comes to mind by Pfhorrest · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah here we see the unfortunately-not-elusive "catch 22" in the wild. Assert that things aren't good enough, ask for better, and leave if you don't get it? You're a whiney complainer. Stay quiet, keep your head down, and don't rock the boat? You're coddled and expect things to be just served up without even asking. Why everyone knows, whenever anything seems not right, the correct response is to stand up and fix it yourself, by sitting down and accepting things just how they are. Right?

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    3. Re:The first question that comes to mind by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you look at the actual report, you can see that men actually report leaving jobs due to unfairness more often than women. There are a lot of patterns shown in the report that aren't reflected accurately in the summary.

  7. Re:Literally in the Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have several friends, who were "devout Christian" types, who's wives did just that: took maternity leave pay with no intention of coming back. I tried to explain to them how messed up that was, but none of them understood.

    It is effectively lying. When you leave and plan to never come back, you are quitting for all intents and purposes. Except your employer believes you have not quit, and you are forcing them to pay you money to hold your job. It is stealing through lying and it screws over everyone else. The manager is probably less likely to hire young women in the future, you cost their business money, you increased resentment and gave a reason for justifying misogyny, you took what you didn't earn, you interfered with the free market by abusing federally mandated handouts (these were also all republicans), the list goes on.

    (Note: I am a Christian too, I'm not bashing that. Just adding context to the moral/ethical baseline of the discussion before someone comes in and says derp derp it's not illegal, or something like that)

  8. Re:The Answer Comes Around 1am by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is indeed more social pressure on men to be the bread winners, similar to how women are pressured to look attractive. And thus we'd expect young men to work harder and longer to try to get the promotions. If you are pressured by society to do X, you are more likely to do X.

    It may not be "fair", but that's society as-is. A quota system doesn't factor this in.

  9. Re:A comment from outside the slashdot sewer: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Accuses white men of "the inherent racism and sexism" and then proceeds to call them "little white male snowflakes".

    I guess it's ok to be a sexist and a racist as long as you're racist and sexist against white men.

  10. Re:The Answer Comes Around 1am by dabadab · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if you want to see who is most successful in IT just watch who walks out the office's front door at 1am, exhausted, stumbling to their car.

    To me it does not sound like "successful" more like "loser".

    a married man who has a strong wife who works as a team with him to fulfill the goals of family.

    I would expect one of the goals of the family is to be actually a family - and that does not really work when you get home from work at 1:30, totally exhausted.

    --
    Real life is overrated.
  11. Re:Literally in the Summary by Orgasmatron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Erm, the parable is intended to illustrate a point about God and salvation by demonstrating it with a metaphor that the hearer is likely to understand. Jesus is saying that you can be fully saved at any time in your life, even if you aren't working all day - and he is using the local cultural norms of shame and honor to drive it home in a way that it is hard for westerners to really understand.

    Parables are not intended to be applied in reverse. Jesus does not support your non-theological argument just because one of the characters in a story he tells says something similar to what you are saying. It is categorically invalid.

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
  12. Quit to be a mother by XXongo · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From my experience, a number of women with boring jobs quit their jobs when they have their first kid. Because they have an excuse.

    Mostly, men are expected to keep their boring jobs even after they have their first kid. In fact, especially after they have their first kid.

    And, make no mistake: most jobs are boring. Having a kid just gives you a good excuse to leave a job that you'd rather leave anyway.