[footlose_3815]

The people who are running the diversity stuff at Google when I was there were very "Eye-for-an-eye".

Some dumb stuff that happened while I was at Google:

* There was a ERG for literally every single race except White people. "Just join one of the others" was what they told me.

* During an onboarding learning exercise because I was merely showing initiative before the rest of the group. "Ok everyone here's my idea". I was tapped on the shoulder by the contractor-teacher-person and asked to move aside and let the group do the very same thing without me.

* Nonwhite employees in my org also got a special mentor who helped them get a leg-up in the company. Some employees were whisked-away from their work responsibilities to go on little field trips with other teams. A few of these people were totally inept technically at their job and I saw them convert into better jobs. It must have been nice.

I'm pretty liberal, but this corpo-liberalism that somehow thinks an eye-for-an-eye to people living in 2025 is insane to me. It might even burn someone so much it changes their politics if they're whimsical.

[IX-103]

That's very different from Google when I was there (both before and after the Damore memo).

1. There were ERGs for old people, young people, people who brought dogs to work, Irish people, Jewish people, etc. I can't imagine why they would say you couldn't create one for the group you wanted.

2. One thing hot-shot programmers fresh out of college need to learn is that while their opinion is valued, they need to listen to other people on the team as they may have important points as well. While it's nice to show initiative, that's L3-L4 thinking. To get to L5 or higher, you need to be able to listen, strategize, and drive consensus. All of those fuzzy things that you became a software engineer to avoid. Because at the end of the day, no one is particularly interested in how clever you are, they're interested in what you can get done. And you can get a heck of a lot more done through working with other people, even if they aren't quite as clever as you. After all, quantity has a quality all its own.

3. Every new employee gets assigned a mentor (at least at the office I was at). I'm not sure how this would differ from the "special" mentor you're talking about, but maybe you can inform me. Though with the level of ego reflected in your post, I'm not sure you would have benefited from a mentor, special or otherwise.

4. Some people that are hired are not as good, technically, as others. I'm aware of confirmation bias, so seeing a few less technically capable employees that happen not to be white doesn't surprise me. And when I do the math, assigning scores to previous co-workers and talking it up, I don't actually see a statistically significant difference in the capabilities based on race (though it does lean a bit towards white males being less capable).

But maybe my Google office wasn't representative, as we weren't one of the main ones.

[bena]

FYI to those not in the lingo ERG is an "Employee Resource Group".

I don't know if it's a common thing at companies or not, but it's a new initialism to me.

[unclebucknasty]

>There was a ERG for literally every single race except White people. "Just join one of the others" was what they told me.

Imagine moving to say, Switzerland, to work for a massive corporation. 90% of the employees are Swiss. The other 10% come from a smattering of other countries from around the world. To help those employees acclimate to a new culture and find support, the company sponsors country-based ERGs.

Of course, there is no Swiss ERG, as it's the "default", because the entire company is essentially a Swiss ERG. But, the company encourages its Swiss employees to join the others as a show of support and cultural exchange.

If you had attended one of those groups, you might have found yourself feeling extraordinarily welcome, and even learned a few things about your fellow employees.

>A few of these people were totally inept technically at their job and I saw them convert into better jobs. It must have been nice.

If "totally inept" people are being promoted with any frequency, then that's a problem for any company. I think we have all seen this occasionally but, in my experience, it has very little to do with race (or other identity) and more to do with the Peter Principle and the fact that hiring and HR management is notoriously hard to get right.

I'm not suggesting anything about the earnestness of your observations, but you should be aware that assuming every non-white person you see at a company is the beneficiary of preferential treatment is a bit of a canard. And the idea that a disproportionate number of those are inept is yet another.

As such, whimsical people might draw rather nasty conclusions from your statements, that are other than what you intended.

[mitthrowaway2]

If Swiss and white were the same thing, that would make a lot of sense. On the other hand if you were a Ukrainian refugee or something, learning Swiss-German as a second language and struggling to integrate into the company's Swiss culture, then it might feel extra-alienating if the company suggests you could join the Asian or Indian employee support groups to help you bridge the culture gap.

OTOH, for the same reason, skin-color-based groups don't really make sense to begin with.

[unclebucknasty]

>If Swiss and white were the same thing, that would make a lot of sense

We all have multiple identities. We relate to those identities and others relate to us by those identities—at times, unfortunately. So, you can substitute any identity here, and it still makes sense.

>it might feel extra-alienating if the company suggests you could join the Asian or Indian employee support groups

Not necessarily. There's certainly some overlap in experience, as they are all working to integrate into the same culture.

What you may be missing here is that it's not strictly about which specific group, but also about the fact that the group is not the majority / "culture-defining group".

>OTOH, for the same reason, skin-color-based groups don't really make sense to begin with.

Oh, if only they didn't, my friend. What a world this would be. It's worth noting that it's generally not those "skin-colors" who made these groups necessary. Part of it is just the complicated tribalism of humans. And, yes, another part of it is that some people have taken advantage of that tribalism.

[rqtwteye]

ERG groups provide mentorship and support. The assumption that all white people, males or in this case Swiss don’t need support or get it automatically is plain wrong.

[unclebucknasty]

>ERG groups provide mentorship and support.

Yes, and Google offers a wide range of mentorship/support programs, from those for community college students to upskilling to new hires to tailored programs and more.

>The assumption that all white people, males or in this case Swiss don’t need support

I don't think anyone assumes that. I certainly don't. I'm sure Google provides other means of support to its employees, and ERGs represent just one approach, which address specific needs for specific employees.

What you have to understand is that people are tribal and that can have effects on "outgroups" in any given context. If we're out at lunch and all but one of us is in the same frat, we may unintentionally exclude that person. It's not necessarily intentional or malicious. That's obviously a simplification, but you can extrapolate.

So, ERGs aren't meant to be punitive or exclusionary. In fact, according to OP, Google encouraged all employees to join whichever groups interested them.

[rqtwteye]

But again, why call out specific groups by gender or race and not call out others? Do people really think that a white guy from some poor area has more privilege and needs less support than some person from {insert oppressed group here} whose family is highly educated?

[unclebucknasty]

>But again, why call out specific groups by gender or race and not call out others?

History. There is an undeniable legacy of gender and race-based discrimination. This discrimination was absolutely laser-focused on gender and race, so is it fairer to simply ignore this and call it a wash?

For instance, some estimates of the value of free labor provided by slaves in the U.S. are upwards of $100 trillion, with an amplification effect (including an inverse one), compounding over generations.

>Do people really think that a white guy from some poor area has more privilege...

No. There are programs for people in rural areas, poorer areas, etc. To the extent that these are inadequate, they should also be addressed.

But, it's not just about economics. It's also about culture, socialization, etc.

[BurningFrog]

Straight white men, or even just white people, is in no way the "default" at Google, and very far from the 90% in your allegory.

[unclebucknasty]

>Straight white men, or even just white people, is in no way the "default" at Google, and very far from the 90% in your allegory.

It's not supposed to map statistically on to Google. It's an analogy, intended to remove the problematic political context.

That said, Asian+White does make up 90%+ of Google's workforce, split roughly in half. Interestingly, there's an Asian ERG.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Of course, there is no Swiss ERG, as it's the "default"

Switzerland is a country of three dominant languages. When I worked for a Swiss bank, they had internal groups for, essentially, domestic expats.

[unclebucknasty]

Not surprising. There are different ways to view identity, and none of us are any one thing. Your observation underscores my point that providing support along the lines of identity can be completely benign sans a political context.

That said, feel free to substitute a more homogenous country if that helps to clarify my point.

[JumpCrisscross]

The point is offering development resources based on race, an immutable characteristic, is deeply unsettling to a lot of people. (I’m not white, for what it’s worth.)

[unclebucknasty]

>offering development resources based on race, an immutable characteristic, is deeply unsettling to a lot of people.

I understand, but I'm trying to provide a point of view that might make it less unsettling. Otherwise, we're just kind of saying that people find it unsettling, so it must be wrong (BTW, we also can't overlook that there are people who want to make it more unsettling, for reasons).

Anyway, it really comes down to backing up a little to consider why race became a factor. Else, if we simply start the clock at the inception of these groups, then I suppose it should be unsettling.

Interestingly, there are other immutable characteristics that do not trigger that unsettledness. If nothing else, this gives us reason to question why this particular characteristic became so charged.

[JumpCrisscross]

> there are other immutable characteristics that do not trigger that unsettledness

Like what?

> this gives us reason to question why this particular characteristic became so charged

Because it's been a tool of social division. As a result, we've been attuned to it culturally from both sides (separation and integration).

[jlawson]

Google is like 45% white, 45% Asian.

Asians have an ERG.

If Whites want to make an ERG, why can't they? What is special about Whites that they must be prevented from doing the thing that literally all others have done?

[unclebucknasty]

>Asians have an ERG.

Google doesn't exist in a vacuum, but in a broader culture (e.g. America). If you're coming from an Asian country, you might still feel alienated or simply want to connect with people who intrinsically understand your culture.

That said, the Asian makeup of Google has increased significantly over the years. I wonder how that has impacted the participation rate in its ERG versus when it was originally established.

>* What is special about Whites that they must be prevented from doing the thing that literally all others have done?*

The dominant culture is essentially the "default" and is somewhat "self-reinforcing", so generally has no need of an identity-based support group. Thus, when the dominant culture does establish an identity-based group, it tends to take on a different meaning.

[jlawson]

> The dominant culture is essentially the "default" and is somewhat "self-reinforcing", so generally has no need of an identity-based support group. Thus, when the dominant culture does establish an identity-based group, it tends to take on a different meaning.

You're being so indirect we're forced to guess at what you mean. Can you please say clearly why you think White must be actually prevented from doing this, when all other groups have already done so?

Not why you think they don't need one - why do you think they must be prevented, even if some of them want to start one?

[wijwp]

As a white man who used to work for G:

> There was a ERG for literally every single race except White people. "Just join one of the others" was what they told me.

What would an ERG for white people even do? What would you want from it?

> Nonwhite employees in my org also got a special mentor who helped them get a leg-up in the company.

There are general mentorship programs, too. Usually focused on career development. I was a part of the main one.

[rqtwteye]

“ What would an ERG for white people even do? What would you want from it?”

What do other groups get? Support, networking, mentorship probably. A lot of white people could use that help too.

[wijwp]

> Support, networking, mentorship

I get plenty of that elsewhere. Do you have issues finding support, networking events, and mentorship programs?

ERGs specifically tend to group those generic, open-to-all programs together and add another layer of `navigating the workplace as [insert ERG demographic]` that doesn't really make sense if you insert "white man".

[rqtwteye]

How about an ERG for people who need support? When I started working I had no idea how things work and nobody told me. I didn't even know that things like mentorship exist. I had been taught by my parents that you go to work and do what you are told to do.

[wijwp]

> I didn't even know that things like mentorship exist.

If you don't know about mentorship programs that already exist and fills at least most of the gap you're talking about, how would you find the ERG?

[jlawson]

>What would an ERG for white people even do? What would you want from it?

The exact same thing as anyone of any other group of course.

To be clear, Whites are a minority at Google. They are also not even the largest group. (Not that this should matter - all groups have the right to exist).

[skyyler]

>Whites are a minority at Google

Is that true? Do white men at google face systemic oppression?

[umbra07]

when did we decide to redefine 'minority' as "faces systemic oppression"?

[skyyler]

I asked a follow up question.

I don't even believe that white men aren't the largest demographic at google.

But even if they aren't, do they face systemic oppression because of this?

Why is it relevant that they aren't a majority?

[jlawson]

Google's own figures say Whites are not the largest group.

Yes, Whites face systemic oppression by any definition of the word. For example, hiring systems set up that systemically prefer others over them.

[yieldcrv]

I’m uninitiated to this concept and not white

and I’m scratching my head about why these same questions arent asked for “employee resource groups” of other minority “themes”

as well as why the ability to empathise is so apparent for those other themes but not so easily imagined for this person who is white

forgot the EEOC, I’m about to go to the SEC Whistleblower bounty program since shareholders might want to know how misguided the population there is

[wijwp]

Well, most other groups have had a rough go at it throughout recent history, and often have to approach the workplace differently because it takes a long time to reverse some of our previous mistakes.

We considered many black folks property until 1865, and we had segregation of some schools in the 1960s. We didn't let women vote until 1920. We put Japanese people in internment camps until 1946. Gay folks couldn't marry in all states until 2015. Do I have to list more?

If you don't think this kind of stuff leaks into the workplace, then I don't think you're paying attention.

[fallingknife]

> We put Japanese people in internment camps until 1946

And now they are economically ahead of the average American. Universities actually discriminate against them by their malevolent definition of "fairness" where success is a punishable offense. People are where they are because of what they do today, not what happened to their ancestors in the past.

[yieldcrv]

That doesn't explain why ERG's exist for that, and it doesn't explain why they are dismissive of what people who are white && and not women encounter in life or as an employee, seeking resources

Why are you invalidating their experience, its look like you have let something else leak into the workplace under an amusingly ironic interpretation of empathy

Let's write it again in a different way: Nothing about the name "Employee Resource Group" suggests that "state-sanctioned disenfranchisement at some point in the country's history" is the only reason or prerequisite for an employee seeking resources

Looks like an another race and ethnicity settlement is brewing

[IX-103]

Look, they had a whiskey drinkers ERG when I was there. For people that like to meet to drink whiskey.

I'm not sure what OP actually proposed, but I'm reasonably sure he's not telling the whole story.

[yieldcrv]

Thanks for the context

[wijwp]

> Why are you invalidating their experience

What experience are you talking about? What resources are lacking that don't address those experiences?

[footlose_3815]

I would have been happy if it was called "White Allies" and it just focused on being a good sensitive person.

[wijwp]

There are plenty of allyship opportunities at big companies. Or at least, there were. I don't really know the status of some companies after the current political environment started changing things.

Focusing on "White Allies" is a bit strange, though. Anyone not directly in a given group can be allies.

[gedy]

Let me take a wild guess that they don't not have a group for former poor people?

[randomNumber7]

So when some are preferred with "equal" skills others are discriminated against.

Why should a rational person support people who act against him. This will horribly backfire...