Code used in the analysis is here

  • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is why statistics are important. Conservatives will say “that’s tokenism! They’re not getting jobs on merit!”

    My guy, quotas for underserved minorities and women exist because we don’t live in a meritocracy. Talent and ambition is dispersed equally. If you are mostly hiring and promoting people like you, that’s exactly why quotas are needed.

    • makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I was recently at a launch party Q&A and a guy in the audience actually asked whether quotas kept deserving men from the job. I shit you not - the product being launched was an educational game about equal treatment of women in the workforce. I guess that showed they were reaching the right people at least.

    • Trantarius@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Quotas are not the only way to combat discrimination, nor are they a good one. Name-blind hiring would resolve name discrimination without making additional presumptions about the applicant pool. A quota presumes that the applicant pool has a particular racial mix, and that a person’s qualifications and willingness to apply are independent of race. And even if those happen to be true, it can’t take into account the possibility that the random distribution of applicants just happens to sway one way or another in a particular instance.