Re:Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs
by kenjackson on Friday January 10, 2025 @01:52PM
(#42658727)
That's not what the original commenter was saying. There are very few roles I've ever seen target diversity hires. Those that I have seen are typically very high-level roles, for example, VP nominations will do things like target "midwest" or for Supreme Court targeting "female". But I don't see this sort of thing in your typical job hiring practice.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs
by pc86 on Friday January 10, 2025 @02:45PM
(#42659348)
I think it's pretty obvious that SCOTUS and VP nominations aren't covered by EEOC and the like, and you're going to have a hard time ham-fisting "diversity hire" into those roles.
> > I've interviewed candidates for DEI specific roles.
This means one of two things. Either they're interviewing for roles on the DEI team, or "I had a role to fill and was told I had to hire a [black, hispanic, female, non-white] person."
The first one doesn't really have anything to do with the comment they're replying to. The second one is blatantly illegal but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. And the next sentence and its tone supports that interpretation.
Is there a third interpretation I'm missing?
Re:Meta's memo to employees rolling back DEI programs
by kenjackson on Friday January 10, 2025 @02:52PM
(#42659418)
The first does have something to do with what he's commenting on. That said, the original poster can clarify since they're on HN, rather than us speculating.