You've attempted to explain away pay gaps by saying it's because of lower roles and/or lower productivity, but that's just the same problem with an extra step. Why are they in lower roles? Why are they assessed as less productive? Are they inherently dumb/lazy/bad, or are we just back to "the pay gap exists because of biases" again?

> What is stopping “black people” from escaping the supposed inequality at NYT and making more money elsewhere ????

Black NYT employees are likely very well aware that the biases they encounter are not unique to the NYT.

this is not a question of labor-corporation negotiation, this is more of sociology/economics question. I have my own theory, but people don't like the bitter truth opinions here for some reason.

> Black NYT employees are likely very well aware that the biases they encounter are not unique to the NYT.

thats another bull presented without proofs. Talented Black engineers are so rare, all big tech/FAANGS are actively hunting them and throwing money at them. Its never been more financially rewarding as ever than to be high performing Black engineer at big tech.

The fact that the situation is as GP described is undeniable. But there can be reasons why things are this way that extend beyond what the racists of yore believed about genetics. Most obviously: Not all subgroups of white people are equally represented in tech either. (When was the last time you were in a team where the majority hailed from Appalachia?)

But actual investigation and remediation can't begin until we can first point at reality and describe it as it currently is.

Rather than "talented engineers can already be hard to find, now divide that by 20".

I think it’s a totally different problem. The problem no longer is about how group X is compensated for doing job Y, but why group X is doing job Y in the first place.

Anyone who has applied for a job knows that switching companies isn’t free, as it would be in a “free market”. There’s any number of outside factors that could prevent it. And switching too often is also viewed negatively, which is not true of e.g. shares of Amazon.

And it’s almost tautological: people who are good at playing organizational games succeed in the organization. Actually measuring engineering productivity isn’t solved at all.

Do we? Your spelling suggests you're not from the US, so I wonder how familiar you are with market conditions. Gotta say your arguments here and above come off as a little shallow.

Do you have a reason to believe the labor market is not free? Like do tech workers in NYT experience slavery/involuntary labor or industry gatekeeping of some sort?

You don't want to be stuck under a bad boss, do you? or do you want to take a gamble that each manager will be perfect (manager can change without your control as well due to restructuring)?

if Corporation treats employees as a perfectly replaceable unit of a Human Resource, then I will treat them as a fungible unit of a Job Description