Google planning to release diversity data about workforce

[Himanshu Arora]

After resisting previous calls, Google is finally planning to release data on diversity of its workforce. The move comes amid increasing pressure on the technology industry to hire more minorities and women.

The announcement was made yesterday by David Drummond, an African-American executive who oversees Google's public policies, during the company's annual shareholders' meeting at its headquarters in Mountain View.

“Many companies in (Silicon Valley) have been reluctant to divulge that data, including Google, and, quite frankly, we are wrong about that", he said, adding that the information will be released next month.

The decision apparently came after longtime civil rights leader the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who appeared at the annual meeting, praised the search giant for its transparency and urged the company to lead the effort to hire more African-Americans, Latinos and women in technology.

Drummond assured Jackson that Google is committed to getting more minorities and women into top tech jobs. The company currently employs around 50,000 people.

According to the most recent census data, Blacks and Hispanics, which make up 13.1 and 16.9 percent of the US population respectively, constitute around 7 percent of the total tech workforce, both in Silicon Valley and nationally.

On the other hand, while a lot of women work in the tech industry, relatively few are in top positions. Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt said the company plans to look for women and minority candidates when there is another opening on its board of directors.

The numbers are compiled as part of a report that major U.S. employers must file with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. However, it is not mandatory for employers to make the information publicly available.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/56766-google-planning-to-release-diversity-data-about-workforce.html

 

[cmbjive]

Lots of Asians and White people, mostly heterosexual and male, work at Google. There, I summed up Google's workforce.

 

[RzmmDX]

Good god, why is there a sudden surge of companies worried about diversity...
Like hiring less qualified people for flight controller jobs just to improve diversity.

And seriously, has anyone who has been complaining about the lack of woman, blacks and Hispanics in stem fields actually been in a stem class...

Can we tackle real issues like global warming? Though, the lack of diversity in the senate is a concern.

 

[davislane1]

"After resisting previous calls, Google is finally planning to release data on diversity of its workforce."

The single most useless datapoint in business.

"The move comes amid increasing pressure on the technology industry to hire more minorities and women."

As a "minority", I've often wondered what characteristic of my genetic makeup intrinsically adds more value to a company than a non-minority. I must have missed the lesson in Stanford's OCW where the instructor discussed the link between genetics and Java. I do recall the topic being covered in some marketing and communication classes, though. Something about public relations.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

This has always been a lot of crap as far as I'm concerned. I believe in hiring the right person for the position irrespective of race, creed, sex or colour. What could be fairer?

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Good god, why is there a sudden surge of companies worried about diversity...
Like hiring less qualified people for flight controller jobs just to improve diversity.

And seriously, has anyone who has been complaining about the lack of woman, blacks and Hispanics in stem fields actually been in a stem class...

Can we tackle real issues like global warming? Though, the lack of diversity in the senate is a concern.

Tackle real issues? Ha! Here are the 3 biggest reasons we won't stop talking about diversity.

1) Funny you bring up the senate. Politics is what drives a lot of this diversity talk. Saying we need to hire more -insert minority here- implies they are disadvantaged. Sometimes they are, but even if they're not, it's important for politicians (particularly democrats) to make sure a large part of the population feels like they're a victim. This helps them 1) come to the rescue in the form of handouts and new taxes on 'other' people and 2) point the blame at the other political party. Nothing gets people together like a common enemy.

2) The other thing that drives diversity talk are those for whom it's a business. Names like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have made a living off of racism, both real and otherwise. It's a good business model because you can't criticize it without being labeled a racist.

3) Racism is clickbait. Putting the word racism in your headlines is a great way to sell a magazine and bring people to your webpage. It helps align people through the common enemy thing (from #1) and it makes money (#2). So even when racism isn't a factor (like with Treyvon Martin) you'll see it front and center.

Your best bet is to use it to your advantage like I did and marry a minority. Then your kids will be able to check whatever box will help them get that job or get into that college.

 

[Guest]

Your best bet is to use it to your advantage like I did and marry a minority. Then your kids will be able to check whatever box will help them get that job or get into that college.

/sarcasm?

 

[Mike Steele]

What's wrong with just hiring the best? being the best has no gender or color barriers. if you aren't the best at what you do, blame yourself and look for something mediocre that will suite you better. then stfu...

 

[davislane1]

What's wrong with just hiring the best? being the best has no gender or color barriers. if you aren't the best at what you do, blame yourself and look for something mediocre that will suite you better.

Based on the content of your post, I've concluded that you were just revived from cryogenic storage and aren't fully up to speed on current social attitudes.

 

[Mike Steele]

Based on the content of your post, I've concluded that you were just revived from cryogenic storage and aren't fully up to speed on current social attitudes.

You've never been with a female, have you?

 

[davislane1]

You've never been with a female, have you?

I was kidding about the cryogenic bit, but if this how you respond to what you feel is a dull joke, I suspect I'm not far off.

A few pointers for taking shots at people:
1. Don't indirectly validate yourself through women. Men w/o anything to prove couldn't care less, and women perceive it as a weakness. You'll get a lot more respect by conceding that your **** controls half of your life than you will bragging about how many "treasures" you've plundered in a society that gives it away on clearance.

2. Don't call people virgins on the internet. It's unoriginal and smacks of an elementary wit. Instead, be terse, carefully pinpointing your target of ridicule with a single, indefensible word.

3. Don't be a **** to a bigger ****. That's only going to get you pissed on. Fortunately for you, I'm well hydrated, so it won't stain. (y)

That said, here's how you should have done it:

Based on the content of your post, I've concluded that you were just revived from cryogenic storage and aren't fully up to speed on current social attitudes.

You've never been with a female, have you? Nerd.