Accused of Underpaying Women, Google Says It's Too Expensive To Get Wage Data (theguardian.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Google argued that it was too financially burdensome and logistically challenging to compile and hand over salary records that the government has requested, sparking a strong rebuke from the U.S. Department of Labor (DoL), which has accused the Silicon Valley firm of underpaying women. Google officials testified in federal court on Friday that it would have to spend up to 500 hours of work and $100,000 to comply with investigators' ongoing demands for wage data that the DoL believes will help explain why the technology corporation appears to be systematically discriminating against women. Noting Google's nearly $28 billion annual income as one of the most profitable companies in the U.S., DoL attorney Ian Eliasoph scoffed at the company's defense, saying, "Google would be able to absorb the cost as easy as a dry kitchen sponge could absorb a single drop of water."

Comments

Not Googles Job

[Rockoon]

Its not Googles job to do the governments bidding.

Furthermore, Google has no incentive to comply because even if the data shows that they are entirely innocent, such facts wont matter to the SJW's.

Re:Not Googles Job

[BarbaraHudson]

There is plenty of proof that men get paid more, moron. Or don't you know how to do a search? Open your mind to facts instead of mindlessly believing shit?

Proof that there is no pay bias? Hah!

And it doesn't end at work. Just look at the bias against women in housework. 8 hours a week for men, 20 hours a week for women. And if the man's retired and the woman's still working, she still has to make her lunch before going to work (I know a woman in that exact situation). It's ridiculous. I'd have told him to turn off the tv and do his share, or you can do your own laundry, your own shopping, and your own cooking and cleaning up. Fair is fair, and that should include an equitable distribution of labour in the home.

Just another reason men die younger. Women get fed up and leave, and they lose their "built-in housekeeper" and can't fend for themselves. And there's a sociological-biological bias against women, because women are generally younger than their spouses, and it's the man who is more likely to need extra care and are unable to do house work for health reasons later on in the marriage. And since women also live longer than men, women are often the ones who end up alone with nobody to help them when they need it. From the BLS

-On an average day, 85 percent of women and 67 percent of men spent some time doing household activities such as housework, cooking, lawn care, or financial and other household management.

On the days they did household activities, women spent an average of 2.6 hours on such activities, while men spent 2.1 hours.

On an average day, 22 percent of men did housework--such as cleaning or laundry--compared with 50 percent of women. Forty-three percent of men did food preparation or cleanup, compared with 70 percent of women. Men were slightly more likely to engage in lawn and garden care than were women--12 percent compared with 8 percent.

So even in the home, where both partners are supposed to be equal, women work more days in housework, for more hours each week. Or did you think that clean underwear magically picked itself off the floor where you left it, jumped into the washing machine, and snuck back into your dresser? You don't see the disparity because you're so used to it everywhere that you've become blind to it.

Re:Not Googles Job

[murdocj]

So discriminating against women is only bad because it's somehow not politically "correct"? I assume that discriminating against non-whites is also not an issue, right?

I hear the 1950's calling, why don't you go back there.

Re:Degrees: gender studies != engineering

[serviscope_minor]

I think this thread is a nice example of how in any thread about bias in tech the comments always lend evidence to there being bias in tech.