zlacker

[parent] [thread] 15 comments
1. ericpa+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-01-03 23:01:47
The issue with this is that, if you ban employers from getting signal about employees, they will attempt to infer the same information by other means. This inference can often be unfairly biased. See related issues with racial discrimination caused by Ban the Box initiatives: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/upshot/ban-the-box-an-eff...
replies(1): >>yieldc+t1
2. yieldc+t1[view] [source] 2024-01-03 23:14:00
>>ericpa+(OP)
> Before the regulations took effect, candidates with criminal histories were far less likely to be called back, irrespective of race.

> After the regulations, lacking the ability to discern criminal history, employers became much less likely to call back any apparently black applicant. They seemed to treat all black applicants now as if they might have a criminal past.

“show us your linkedin”

replies(3): >>al_bor+z9 >>Hideou+Qk >>throwa+632
◧◩
3. al_bor+z9[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 00:23:05
>>yieldc+t1
When I was involved in hiring I was told we couldn’t do any online research on potential candidates, like LinkedIn or Facebook, as it might give us information on them being part of a protected class. It’s easier to justify not picking someone based on merit when there is no knowledge of those things.
replies(1): >>chihua+Le
◧◩◪
4. chihua+Le[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 01:09:00
>>al_bor+z9
When I was looking for a job a few months ago, every single application required answering multiple questions about whether I'm Hispanic, and if not, which race I am. Additionally, some employers demand to know my sexual identity AND orientation, which I consider ludicrous and obscene. "Before we can consider your application, we must know who you like to have sex with!"

Ostensibly this is for some kind of reporting and statistics, but I feel bad while answering it every time (about 100+ times last year) and wonder if checking the box that says "prefer not to say" automatically disqualifies me.

replies(5): >>bombca+qf >>yieldc+7h >>JChara+Aj >>d0gsg0+lk >>minkie+Rm
◧◩◪◨
5. bombca+qf[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 01:16:32
>>chihua+Le
I feel a concentrated program to always check “do not say” would be powerfully useful. There’s no way it doesn’t get seen/noticed. Proof: next time check a box that obviously doesn’t apply and watch if they notice.
◧◩◪◨
6. yieldc+7h[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 01:34:47
>>chihua+Le
I've seen so much vitriol from the pronoun army - the ones that don't need them but want to make it inclusive for the people that do need them - that I really wonder if its optional in the organizations/applications that ask

like "oh he didn't write a pronoun at all! he's not a culture fit!" we've decided to move forward with other candidates that more closely align with our qualifications

replies(1): >>tczMUF+Vw
◧◩◪◨
7. JChara+Aj[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 02:02:57
>>chihua+Le
Yeah I find it very obscene that they ask so so many obtrusive questions for "statistics"
replies(1): >>conduc+7l
◧◩◪◨
8. d0gsg0+lk[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 02:11:07
>>chihua+Le
I wonder if anyone has gamed this system yet. Accidentally click "gay latino" to get through the HR filters. AFAIK HR won't send that metric down to the interviewers. So if you crush the interview loop then HR's hands may be tied.
◧◩
9. Hideou+Qk[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 02:17:42
>>yieldc+t1
Black people commit and are convicted of commiting significantly crime more than white people per capita. Whether this is due to racism, economics, or whatever is irrelevant, but when you can't check specifically for criminal records race becomes an excellent proxy. ~4% of white men will go to jail at some point in their life vs about 28% of black men. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/Llgsfp.pdf

That said, sex is also an excellent proxy since men commit far more crime than women. I wonder if women are more likely to get hired when criminal background checks are forbidden?

replies(1): >>yieldc+rl
◧◩◪◨⬒
10. conduc+7l[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 02:20:07
>>JChara+Aj
I believe it’s compulsory or at minimum a way to protect themselves. I always choose the “rather not answer” option to every question that specifies it. The hiring managers rarely get to see the answers.

Oddly enough, I’m a white male and the most protected class “abuses” I’ve ever witnessed is when I’ve been told I wasn’t allowed to hire white males. I’ve actually been told I could not hire any one except a women before. My team was shorthanded for a year. I work in a niche that is probably 90%+ male and probably 70% white.

What’s also weird is, I usually hire through recruiters so when I tell them “only send me female resumes” the search just goes radio silent and I don’t even see what kind of talent I’m missing out on.

replies(1): >>throwa+L32
◧◩◪
11. yieldc+rl[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 02:23:42
>>Hideou+Qk
the article I quoted looked at high school dropouts and the number was 70% for black men. everyone understands that there are supporting statistics, and are simply trying to get the population to be more productive. there was buyin from the public sector in many cities by the voters, but then the private sector who is worried about who they are working with did not buy in. we are still looking for solution about how to get people productive, not whether it is accurate to assume someone has a conviction and be correct.
◧◩◪◨
12. minkie+Rm[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 02:44:24
>>chihua+Le
I go with “prefer not to say” and had no problem getting offers as a straight white cis male.

I’ve been a fairly high level hiring manager at multiple firms and those answers never mattered or were even visible to me; even at the VP level.

◧◩◪◨⬒
13. tczMUF+Vw[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 04:36:33
>>yieldc+7h
> "oh he didn't write a pronoun at all! he's not a culture fit!"

I find this particularly sad because of how harmful it is to trans people, especially trans people who are not "out". Forcing such people to specify a pronoun is forcing them to choose between "out yourself to everyone" and "disavow your own identity", and feels just awful. Not to mention people in earlier stages of understanding their own gender, who may feel a pointed distaste for the pronouns that they've always used without quite understanding why.

(To clarify tone, I'm not criticizing your comment.)

replies(1): >>diijo+Jv3
◧◩
14. throwa+632[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 16:25:46
>>yieldc+t1
> “show us your linkedin”

Easy. Do they spot a blank in your employment record? Tell them that you took time off to take care of a sick relative (mother is the best really). I have used it so many times. The Rosey and Richard Noseys shut right the fuck up every single time. If you really want to play with their emotions, tell them something awful about the end of life process. "Don't ask questions where you don't want to know the answers!"

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
15. throwa+L32[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-04 16:29:10
>>conduc+7l
My response will be controversial: I am unsympathetic. Find the 9%+ of women. If they don't exist, they hire brilliant new grads and train them.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
16. diijo+Jv3[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-01-05 01:13:30
>>tczMUF+Vw
Therein lies the risk of adopting a fictional identity based on a nonsensical and unrealistic belief system.
[go to top]