[thekashifmalik]

Interesting to see the pay gap charts.

> our gender gap data shows that companies are still struggling to offer their female and BIPOC workers equal pay for equal work

Does this data account for levels or years of experience? For example, if there are more junior-level women in the industry than senior-and-above level women, then of course you'd expect women to earn less, percentage-wise.

If it's not accounted for, then the quoted statement seems false.

Similarly, how come asian workers are left out in the following statement:

> With a broad stroke, male and White/Caucasian workers simply earn more than their counterparts.

It seems asian workers earn even more so it's weird how only white/caucasian is called out.

[jjulius]

>It seems asian workers earn even more so it's weird how only white/caucasian is called out.

The ethnicity graph in that section begins with, "Asian and White/Caucasian workers see similar annual pay".

[np-]

To be fair to the parent comment, you need to click “By Ethnicity” to see that Asians and White earn similar pay comment (at least on the mobile version), it does not appear without a user interaction. However the general conclusion that Caucasians earn more is viewable by default, so someone who skims the article is going to come to a very different conclusion than someone who read it carefully. And let’s be honest here, most people are probably just going to skim it (and even more honestly, I personally skimmed it and didn’t even realize it was addressed until I read this comment chain).

[thekashifmalik]

Yes that is correct. What I'm quoting is in the summary paragraph above that.

How you present data is important and I'm wondering why it's not presented there.

[jjulius]

In the same spirit, I suppose one could say that it's weird that, in your first post, you didn't mention that it does ultimately say that on the website.

/shrug

[thekashifmalik]

I suppose the point I tried to make is that the conclusion presented in the summary omits asians as high-earners and that changes the take-away.

My conclusion would have been:

"With a broad stroke, male, asian and White/Caucasian workers simply earn more than their counterparts."

which is different from:

> With a broad stroke, male and White/Caucasian workers simply earn more than their counterparts.

I could be misunderstanding the point you are making.

[jjulius]

>I could be misunderstanding the point you are making.

I don't disagree with the broader point that you're making, I'm just pointing out that you're doing what you're critiquing as you critique it. Your first post says that they don't actually say what the data shows, and you go on to suggest that an improper presentation of data can cause people take away the wrong idea.

I'm saying that you choosing not to mention the fact that they do state that fact accurately merely a few sentences later also could cause people to take away the wrong idea.

[thekashifmalik]

I don't understand the point of this conversation.

> Your first post says that they don't actually say what the data shows

And I maintain that the summary omits and misrepresents what the data shows.

> I'm saying that you choosing not to mention the fact that they do state that fact accurately merely a few sentences later

It's behind a click. It actually doesn't show at all without a click. I missed it the first time I skimmed the article (thank you for pointing it out) and I'm sure other people will as well.

[jiscariot]

There are also pretty significant median age differences between ethnic populations and whites in the US (15 years IIRC). Unfortunately, you never see that controlled for.

[CardenB]

It seems that they have a chart for pay gap by tenure, which is by years of experience.

[thekashifmalik]

I saw that section. It's weird to me to use tenure here instead of industry experience or level since tenure specifically means how long you've been at the same job.

In my experience in tech, staying at the same company (long-tenured) is the best way to ensure you are underpaid. They seem to allude to that with:

> The “Great Resignation” may present an opportunity for long-tenured, underpaid workers to find competitive pay elsewhere.

If my understanding is correct then that doesn't account for what I'm calling experience or level.

[autarch]

> It seems that they have a chart for pay gap by tenure, which is by years of experience.

Tenure just refers to how long someone has been with a specific company, not how long they've been in the industry.

So it's suggestive of _something_ bad that the pay gap increases with tenure for many categories of job, but it's not at all conclusive.