Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo by gdix on Tuesday August 08, 2017 @12:48AM (#14954440)

>To conclude that suggesting any changes to an interview process is an implicit indication that the people currently employed by a company were unqualified means that no improvements could ever be made.

That's exactly my point.

Replace "brainteaser" with "being an underrepresented minority" and you'll see why it's absurd to suggest his manifesto is tantamount to saying "some of my teammates shouldn't have been hired".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo by brlewis on Tuesday August 08, 2017 @10:39AM (#14958179)

If there's a big discussion about underqualified lovers of brainteasers being hired, and my coworkers start to look at me suspiciously, I can simply stop wearing my "I love brainteasers" tee shirt. Underrepresented minorities don't have that option.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo by gdix on Tuesday August 08, 2017 @03:16PM (#14961483)

What's your point?

If we would like to stop using an irrelevant but unchangeable trait (such as gender or race) as a basis for hiring and recruiting, what should we do?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo by brlewis on Tuesday August 08, 2017 @03:23PM (#14961560)

We should proceed with caution and tact.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo by gdix on Thursday August 10, 2017 @01:22AM (#14976682)

Yes, good point.

[ Parent | on HN ]