[pj_mukh]

Who’s actually doing this? In a way that is actually documented? Most evidence I’ve seen of this happening has been hearsay.

Note: Trying to make the applicant pool more diverse is not the same as hiring someone solely because of diversity.

[manfredo]

Intel started to withhold a portion of bonuses unless engineering departments achieved percentages of diverse employees, and other companies have followed suit [1]. Microsoft gives hiring managers incentives to hire people of certain genders and ethnicities, which was brought into question recently [2].

I can personally confirm that this results in discriminatory behavior when my previous company instituted these policies. Diverse candidates that failed 2/3rd of our interviews usually got offers, whereas non-diverse candidates generally had to pass 2/3rds of the interviews or more. This year, the company introduced a policy of withholding 20 positions for diverse candidates. When people know their bonuses are going to be compromised unless they hit N% diversity, do you really expect them to treat diverse candidates and non-diverse candidates the same? The company institutes these policies and then it's speak no evil, hear no evil, see no evil.

It might not be as egregious as "hiring someone solely because of diversity" but it's definitely discrimination.

1. https://www.payscale.com/compensation-today/2019/03/tie-bonu...

2. https://qz.com/1598345/microsoft-staff-are-openly-questionin...

[growlist]

>Who’s actually doing this? In a way that is actually documented?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Also I think it stretches the bounds of credulity to assert that an industry that bangs on and on about wanting to increase diversity is somehow also a perfect, disinterested and impartial judge.

[dlp211]

OP made a positive claim, it's on them to prove it.