Re: I can understand a little bit of bias
Indeed, the examples of what is 'Asian' are definitely needed for clarity. As I read the detailed complaint, Dept of Labor don't seem to qualify 'Asian' at all . That's really annoying.
Given the current geopolitical realities, heck given the recent convictions and cases made against certain national actors, there is going to be a higher bar for specific nationalities. Sorry folks, we're not all just folk.
Filipino, Malay, Indonesian, Pacific Islander, Thai, Indian, Pakistani, Singaporean, Japanese, Vietnamese... are all Asian nationalities. That's a really wide range. Hmm, what am I missing? Umm, yeah, you know and you know why...
BUT... reading the detailed complaint, the numbers do look really bad. (Sorry, having to type this in cuz PDF won't copy-n-paste easily cuz it's a graphic copy):
"For the Software Engineer position, from a pool of more than 1,160 qualified applicants -- approximately 85% of whom were Asian -- Palantir hired 14 non-Asian applicants and only 11 Asian applicants. The adverse impact calculated by OFCCP exceeds five standard deviations."
"For the QA Engineer Intern position, from a pool of more than 130 qualified applicants -- approximately 73% of whom were Asian -- Palantir hired 17 non-Asian applicants and only four Asian applicants. The adverse impact calculated by OFCCP exceeds six standard deviations."
That's going to be really really hard to 'normalize'.
Hmm, could they plead customer requirements? That the positions where for particular projects were the 'customer' specified really high security? PDF mentions lots of non-discrimination points. Could the company interject 'security' as an overriding consideration?