[grapehut]

I've conducted technical interviews for a FAANG company for several years, and been explicitly told to go easy on and inflate the scores of minorities. On one hand it makes sense as we're trying to hire minority groups on a greater ratio than they're coming out of college. On the other hand, it doesn't surprise me they retention rates a lot lower when often they're thrown into positions they would otherwise not be really qualified for.

[SlowBall]

Isn't that technically illegal according to federal law? I.e. aren't you effectively discriminating against other people based on their sex and/or race (by making their interviews more difficult explicitly because of that reason)?

[padastra]

The probability that the DOJ would investigate / prosecute this particular bias is near zero. Where I work, if you submit a bad review for an underrepresented minority you will get a call from HR asking “are you absolutely sure? You don’t think that’s too low?” (even if you also submitted good reviews for other employees of that racial group).

What’s funny is: in five years researchers looking at the data will say “oh! There’s a higher attrition rate / poor performance even though prior reviews marked them as good! THAT must be where all this systemic racism we are trying to find is!”

[anon7725]

I’ve witnessed candidates pass interviews yet fail to be advanced for open positions because they were not in the correct demographic - this was put in writing as the explicit cause. Ironically these were not “white guys,” but candidates who would be considered a minority in the tech industry, just not the right one for executive metrics.

This seems to be quite illegal according to the EEOC website, yet as another poster notes there is no chance that it would be pursued if reported.

[ttt0]

Yes, it's illegal.

[cudgy]

I wonder why they don’t help them get more qualified if that is the goal of the company. My guess is that it would be admitting the new hires are deficient which could backfire.