It's like you are judging a tasting contest by the color of icing instead of eating it.
I'm a vet. This is a band-aid and I'd discourage you from thinking this way because it's short term at best.
If you want to hire more vets then companies need to find where vets are. Some of us use our VA benefits and get a degree, others meet the stress of post-separation and collapse. Both will still end up in the field, but companies will not train or treat them the same. That's why companies are now doing that whole, "atypical background" search. Apprenticeship programs within companies would also strengthen vet (and other DEI category) numbers given the absence of an industry wide apprenticeship program.
It was always my opinion that if the goal is more diverse hiring then more diverse sourcing is required.
> pressure on HMs to hire more women despite 95% of applicants being male
is something I've done myself, not to hold anything against the applicants coming in but because HMs have a significant amount of control over the funnel of applications coming in. I want them hustling to encourage women, minorities, veterans, old-timers, re-inventors, people with nonstandard educational paths--people from ALL walks of life who are qualified, to get them to apply. I want it because I firmly believe that will make the engineering departments I work for more healthy.
> people championing all women teams as a win for diversity
I have been on many all-men teams in my career. I wouldn't consider it a specific diversity goal, but I do not think _one_ all-woman team is likely to put a dent in balancing, let alone over-balancing, the scales.
> women getting a salary premium
ROFL, I would _love_ to see an instance of this.