Diversity At Google Hasn't Changed Much Over the Last Year (cnet.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNET: Not much changed at Google over the last year when it came to the diversity of the tech giant's workforce. Google released its annual diversity report on Thursday detailing the composition of its workforce. The percentage of female employees rose by .1 percent to 30.9 percent. The percentage of Asian employees grew by 1.6 percent to 36.3 percent. The number of black and Latino employees grew by .1 percent to 2.5 percent and 3.6 percent, respectively.

"Google's workforce data demonstrates that if we want a better outcome, we need to evolve our approach," said Danielle Brown, chief diversity and inclusion officer at Google, in the report. "That's why from now on ownership for diversity and inclusion will be shared between Google's leadership team, People Operations and Googlers. Our strategy doesn't provide all the answers, but we believe it will help us find them."

Comments

Re:Trump is going to Federal Prison shortly

[murdocj]

So I guess Manafort getting thrown in jail is just more "fake news"?

Re:Don't worry Trump traitor, Mueller has plenty

[ScentCone]

So, indeed, you've got exactly no information. Not a single statute you can cite. Not a scrap of a reason to explain why you think a prison sentence would result. Only a witless question about why every lawyer in the world tells every client in the world that they have no reason whatsoever to sit down voluntarily with a predatory special counsel that has hired a 100% partisan Democrat team of assistants who have shown that - lacking any substance related in any way to their actual mission from the DoJ - they are mostly interested in trying to trip up the person they're talking to. You know, to get them to recall and describe a distant event or conversation in two different ways so they can attempt to ruin them on a process matter unrelated to their actual supposed investigation.

And since we've just seen evidence of yet another Mueller investigator being so overtly biased that even Mueller thought it was too much to be allowed to be seen in public, and added him to the list of people he's had to fire for their Clinton-machine, anti-Trump political agenda ... why would, especially in light of the DoJ IG's recent report showing how pervasive that political agenda has been among the people that far up the DoJ food chain, why would anyone who hasn't done anything wrong (you yourself can't even cite anything) bother themselves to sit through that process? Trump won't get the pre-interview-already-guaranteed-no-friction pass that Hillary Clinton got from her partisan supporters at the top of the FBI, so why even screw around with it?

Of course you have special, secret knowledge that nobody in congressional oversight committees with access to millions of documents has. You've got secret inside info that hasn't been leaked out even though everything else has been. And you're SO good at keeping your secret info secret that even now while you're telling everyone that prison is appropriate, you can't share your special secret knowledge to even indicate which actual laws were broken. On the other hand, we can point to specific laws that Hillary Clinton and her staff broke, but of course her staff were all given immunity while talking about it, even though we just saw that the FBI agents interviewing them concluded that her staff had repeatedly lied during interviews. Without consequence. Yeah, sit down in front of people that biased in order to talk about how nothing you've done broke any laws. Your point being?

Cite the violated laws, coward. Otherwise, admit you're just spewing partisan BS that you'd never say about the actually guilty party you're still shilling for.