Nadella says senior management pay now linked to improving gender diversity Karma no longer seems to be the main factor in improving gender diversity at Microsoft, with CEO Microsoft Satya Nadella saying the compensation of the senior team is now anchored to making progress on the issue. Speaking at the launch of his book Hit Refresh at the Lords Cricket Ground, Nadella said: "When we talk about the …
Diversity used to have a positive meaning in the Silicon Valley. The American Dream used to mean that any person, of any sex, any race or religion can succeed in the USA based on their Merit and Achievements.
Today, Silicon Valley has turned "Diversity" into an ugly code word for "Acceptable, selective racism."
In the Silicon Valley now, many companies have blatantly racist "Diversity" programs that will hire a less qualified Black candidate over a more qualified Indian, Chinese, Korean, White, etc. The "privileged" black candidate gets hiring preference simply because of the color of their skin.
America is going down an ugly slippery spiral of "acceptable racism" in the name of diversity. Whoever cries the loudest seems to get the most pampering. These corporations are essentially being held hostage by a few self-entitled racists.
Today,
Nothing new about it. Not particularly American problem either.
For example, most Eastern European countries had different entry criteria for men and women to try to balance things. As a result, it was relatively easy for a guy to get into life sciences or for a girl into physics while the opposite took straight As and sometimes even that was not enough.
USSR went even further. It had equalization quotas based on nationalities. They were defined based on percentage of the population. As a result nationalities with higher than average education level like Jews had trouble getting into the top end universities even with straight As. At the same time some of the more "obscure" minorities pretty much just needed to show up. So, it is not surprising that the USSR equal opportunities program is always quoted as a classic example of anti-Semitism.
One of the first things to go after the fall of the wall was the equal opportunities program.
I have no opinion what is right or wrong here - history shows that BOTH approaches (leaving things to itself and affirmative action) have their downsides.
This post has been deleted by its author
"America is going down an ugly slippery spiral of 'acceptable racism' in the name of diversity."
has been happening since the concept of racial (and sex) hiring quotas were introduced as "a way" of ensuring that discrimination doesn't happen (back in the 60's) - which of course means discrimination DOES happen in the name of anti-discrimination.
Stupid l[aw]yers. Stupid politicians. Stupid gummint. Stupid liberals.
Must be some "quota hire" that thunk THAT one up
So the tactical PHB has a word with some of the men they are in charge of...
"I get a pay rise if we get more women, but obviously you want to keep your job"
"I will split some of that cash if you claim to be transgender and identify as female (getting our female numbers up, as if anyone says, "no, you are a bloke" then its jump on the LGBT(etc) persecution HR route & you get lots of discrim cash & split some with me)"
We both get richer, you keep your job, Female numbers up. Win, win.
especially so if they play the LGBT card
Well of course. That's one thing that has NO PLACE IN THE WORKPLACE.
I really don't mind what people get up to in their bedrooms, nor with whom. My wife and I were married by a gay vicar (brilliant bloke, the Cof E did NOT approve of him, but wouldn't take action against him).
But whilst I don't go round shouting "Hey! Hetero-guy here! Look at me in my masculine trousers! Do you know what me and a female woman did in bed last night? Would you like to see my chest hair ladies!", a significant minority of LGBT individuals seem to want to broadcast their proclivities, be thanked for it, and still bloody whine that they're being dealt a shit hand in the workplace. Look at the fabulous own goal the National Trust scored by foisting a Guardian-columnist LGBT agenda on their unpaid volunteers - what the fuck was the point of that, other than to please the LGBT-activists? And on that subject, worth noting that decent politically active people of an LGBT persuasion like Peter Tatchell have been targeted by the moronic ingrate LGBT militants.
I'll say it again, I don't mind what you get up to at home. But don't expect special treatment because of what you do there. If there's snowflakes here, it's the militant LGBT twerps, getting a bad name for the majority of LGBT types who simply wish to be allowed to get on with their lives without being labelled and fitted to a quota.
"decent politically active people of an LGBT persuasion like Peter Tatchell "
Wasn't he the leader of the group who outed people in the public eye regardless of whether they chose to be outed or not ? I hardly think (whoever it was if it wasn't him) that they deserve the "decently politically active" tag, rather "invader of privacy troll"
Within the field of technology shouldn't you be focusing on qualifications over gender? It doesn't matter if the person is a male, female or AI as long as he, she or it is qualified.
Which is another thing: people keep talking about the "Technology sector" and all but in the end it's still evolved around commercial companies which try to make money. And in order to do that they hire the people which they deem fit for the job. Their company, their environment, their payroll, their jobs.
And with that also comes their right to include or exclude certain people I think.
Within the field of technology shouldn't you be focusing on qualifications over gender?
(Pause for thought)
Within the field of technology work shouldn't you be focusing on qualifications over gender?
If I was in hospital facing complicated surgery I would want the surgeon to be the very most qualified and experienced, not the one who could accumulate the greatest number of ticks in "disadvantaged" boxes or the one who is there based on some sort of "quota".
The old hospital surgery straw man, well not for much longer. You can lie there happy knowing that diversity makes us stronger. Though some security was missed in the hospital electronics, a performance bias was included that considers your relative worth on the rainbow scale and your privilege level. While you might die, a cross dressing Latino man may live. See how warm and fuzzy that makes you feel. Similarly the AI in your self driving car will be capable of split second value judgments as to who should live and who should die in a collision, even if a circuitous route is needed to reach that outcome. Diversity is not just about gender, sexual orientation and colour but about value and intent.
Surgery is still a highly technical matter...
The problem is people outside the technical world don't understand (or do, but don't like it) the fact that outcomes can be measured quantitatively without ambiguity, and thereby you can tell who is factually more skilled.
That's very different from the "arts" world (including politics) were value is subjective. You just need to gather enough "consensus" that your work is more valuable - hoping no one cries "the emperor has no clothes!".
Still, the same "arts" world may be one of the less diverse you can see... strictly tied in canons you can't violate.
The magic of numbers.
Numerical targets lead to strange phenomena in my experience.
What the computeration business needs to do is just be grown up and accept people on the basis of what they can produce.
And, sure, outreach programs to your local community, code clubs &c to give people a chance to find out what computeration is all about.
Let's face it, less than 10% of your co-workers do 100%
40% does 60%, and the rest is dead weight between meetings and long bathroom breaks.
The Women and Minority hires have definitely not helped these numbers.
I could talk about them as individuals, unfortunately, they were hired, not based
on meritocracy but because of their gender, skin color or religious beliefs.
Screw'em and the extra work they cause others.
"40% does 60%, and the rest is dead weight between meetings and long bathroom breaks."
I'm a teacher. In teaching, there is, I can assure you, no dead weight. You sink or swim. Your colleagues will know which within a couple of weeks. In the UK, teaching jobs have a one year 'probationary period' - which is HR speak for 'if you are crap we can get rid of you quickly'. My posse is diverse, to the extent of being like a Benneton poster. We can all deliver. Students find familiar faces and body shapes reassuring. Teaching is not a bullshit job.
What I'm sneaking up to here is a 'challenging question' (as we say in teaching)
Are most IT jobs actually bullshit jobs where the performance in the role actually has little impact on the org?
This is a bullshit comment.
My experience of teachers, is unsurprisingly, like everything else that there are some very good ones and some very bad ones with many somwhere in between.
Probationary periods are not something exclusive to teaching but near universal.
On the diversity of your 'posse' teaching is a a notoriously sexist profession with a disproportionate number of women and a high attrition rate for men. The commonest reason given by men leaving the profession early is fear of unfounded accusations against men.
Teaching obviously has a serious sexism problem if you go to the NUT website and follow the equality link they have pages for black, LGBT, disable and women teachers (who are a massive majority anyway!) but nothing for men. The NUT obviously considers equality fine as long as it does not apply to men. This certainly was my experience at school with a number of women teachers being quite openly sexist and making disparaging comments about boys in general. When you consider the relatively poor performanc eof boys at school this should be a much bigger concern than the supposed issue in technology.
@AC
"teaching is a a notoriously sexist profession"
I'd accept that there is an institutional gender bias. Teaching in primary schools offers mandatory hours and a calendar that fits well with having children, so attractive to people who are the main carers in a family, and that I accept is still predominantly women. I accept the point about the scarcity of men in primary sector - but teacher gender ratios closer (but not equal to) parity in secondary, the figures I can find are in the 60% to 65% women range. College sector (where I teach) is in my experience closer to parity.
"This certainly was my experience at school with a number of women teachers being quite openly sexist and making disparaging comments about boys in general."
I used to hear that kind of stuff in 90s/00s but not so much recently at College level. There is an awareness that boys/men are underperforming and there are attempts to counter that.
My team/group whatever is 5 chaps and 4 chapesses
Opinions vary. Most Colleges and adult education settings will welcome volunteers subject to dbs if you have time to spare. Many have found the experience illuminating.
Teaching not sexist?
"This certainly was my experience at school with a number of women teachers being quite openly sexist and making disparaging comments about boys in general."
I used to hear that kind of stuff in 90s/00s but not so much recently at College level. There is an awareness that boys/men are underperforming and there are attempts to counter that.
So teachers can make disparaging sexist commente to large numbers of children and nobody blinks an eye. If I said any such remark against women to a single adult let alone a roomful it woudl be worng and I would be in serious trouble.
The awareness of boys underpeforming may be wide spread but the NUT equality information only has information to support for women, LGBT, disabled and black as does the NASUWT web site.
We constantly hear about th3 need for more women in technology but nothing about men in schools. In technology there is little reason to think diversity directly relates to the quality of output whereas there is research suggesting problems with boys taught exclusively by women teachers. An OECD report showing strong gender bias by women teachers against boys being just one.
Yes the teaching profession has a serious sexism problem especially comapred to science and technology.
Criteria, any race other than white (preferably transracial), religion muslim or jewish or some recognized religion other than anything those based on Jesus, transgender, LGBTQXYZ (whatever it is now), have a mental disability, a physical disability, a military veteran that is over 50. This one person will then count as nine people on the diversity charts maybe more if they have schizophrenia.
"military veteran that is over 50"
Yeah, I _WISH_ that gave me an advantage. More likely to get AGE DISCRIMINATION because I believe I'm worth more [or am more willing to bargain for higher wages] for all of that experience, tend to speak up to those "young whippersnappers" who _FEEL_ (not think) that their ideas are "so great" [but obviously aren't, to an old guy], etc. etc..
[it's never fair]
@ bombastic bob
Bob, there seems to be precious little room in the multi-culti, gender-bender crowd for any recognition of, much less any discussion of, age discrimination. As you are well aware, it is out there in the workplace, and it is growing, not shrinking.
"people like them give women a bad name"
So a handful of female CEOs that screwed up "give women a bad name", but thousands of years and millions of male leaders of companies/governments/transcontinental empires etc. don't give men a bad name?
Look, I question the validity of affirmative action as much as the next guy, but dude, that's some completely unsupportable sexist bullshit right there. What the fuck.
The problem is one of ratios. For every Emma Walmsley there's a Liv Garfield and a Veronique Laurent.
Whilst we have good male Prime Ministers to balance out the majority of awful ones, on the female side there is no one, just Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May - both almost pure evil.
Or with monarchs, Liz 2 and Victoria don't erase the memory of Mary 1 and Liz 1.
Marjorie Scardino was massively better than John Fallon, but John is just another male CEO whereas Marjorie was a one-off.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
