[budde]

He may have not told his direct teammates they lowered the bar but he certainly implied that women and underrepresented groups have at a whole at Google:

> The Harm of Google’s biases:

...

> - A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidates

...

> - Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate.

Do you really not see the concerns this engineer has introduced for Google over his ability to objectively judge his peers who are women or members of an underrepresented group or at least how such coworkers might now have these concerns if they find themselves working with him? Do you not see how the long-term detriment and risk to Google could be (substantially) greater than the value the engineer brings to the company? Even if you remove the high-mindedness and virtues that tech companies like to project in their PR, do you not see how this is the only rational business choice for a Fortune 50 company?

[weberc2]

Seems like Google introduced the problems, he merely exposed them.

[bostik]

There is something I don't understand. The third quoted line should raise an entirely different question.

You are in the position where you want to constantly hire a lot of qualified candidates. If you have discovered a way to decrease false negative rate, why would you not apply that across the board? It's like you have learned how to fix hiring but then carry it out only with some arbitrary cohorts.

Sounds irrational to me.

[panda88888]

My guess is maybe because it cost too much to implement it across the board, and the side effect that focused application results in more minority/women hires.