There was a company meeting one year at Amazon when they proudly announced that men and women were paid within 1-2% of each other for the same roles. It completely missed the point which you raise.
I want to see reports of average tenure and time between promotions by gender. I suspect that the reason we don't see those published is that the numbers are damning.
Or possibly noone did a study of sufficient size that passed peer review.
It's also not hard to make the pay gap 1-2% just like it's not hard to make it 25% (both values are valid). Statistics is a fun field. Don't trust statistics you didn't fake yourself.
Amazon could easily cook the numbers to get to 1-2%, I doubt anyone checked the process of determining that number if it's unbiased and fair and accounts for other factors or not.
I didn't write anything about promotions. I mentioned tenure and performance reviews.
If you had a way to accurately predict that some company would systematically donwrate you and eventually fire you or force you to quit, would you want to interview there? If you were a recruiter in that company and could accurately predict the same, would it be ethical for you to hire the candidate anyway?
This is not to say that I approve of blindly trusting AI to filter candidates, but the overall issue isn't nearly as simple as many comments here make it out to be.
Aggressive behavior is considered admirable in men, and deplorable in women. Many women I know have noted comments in their performance reviews about their behavior - various words that can all be distilled to "bitchy".
downvoters, please explain. The statement makes sense when you look at it in tech where there are more men than women. So it may appear that more men are getting promoted compared to their women counterparts. But that doesn't mean men >>> women, it's just statistics at play.
I want to see reports of average tenure and time between promotions by gender. I suspect that the reason we don't see those published is that the numbers are damning.