Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

aaabigwyattmann3 t1_iu985n2 wrote

>Microsoft’s Black U.S. workers earned about 77 cents on the dollar, Hispanic workers were at about 82 cents, and Asian workers were at about 95 cents for every dollar earned by white workers, the company’s data showed.

Suppose a White person makes $200k. Then Black makes $154k, Hispanic makes $164k, Asian makes $190k

Sounds like in this situation, the quick solution would be to give everyone raises to 200k, but they wont, because they would prefer to lower everyones salary. So the problem, as usual, is greedy executives.

−21

anon_tobin t1_iu9gsav wrote

It's a little weird because the $154k salary is tied to a role. So there are white guys and black guys who work the same job and both make $154k. However, there are more white guys working the $200k job.

Raising the salaries of the $154k roles would be nice but wouldn't solve the problem of representation at what are likely more influential levels of the company. I haven't thought about this all enough to know whether the money at this one company is the important thing, or whether we're using it as a proxy for discrimination and equity and stuff.

29

yoortyyo t1_iu98l9p wrote

Unions. Unions solve this.

Secret individual negotiation for salary only favors the employer.

3

BarrySix t1_iu9n6pu wrote

I agree with unions in principle, but not so much in practice.

Unions give bad staff protection and a better deal. Look at the madness of police unions.

−5

dungone t1_iua0msy wrote

Police unions are not real Unions. They are more like gangs.

2

nowutz t1_iuag84p wrote

##Police unions are gangs.

5

BarrySix t1_iucjcpr wrote

That has nothing to do with unions. Police are gangs or mobsters with or without unions.

1

BarrySix t1_iucj47p wrote

Fair point.

Ok take teacher unions. They should be a wonderful thing and exactly what the world needs. In practice they make false claims about representing students to get the public on side while working against student interests. They support teachers who should be fired and do little or nothing for teachers who perform well.

I'm not anti-union at all. But I've seen they just don't help in the way they should.

−1

Theyna t1_iu9m6e2 wrote

"Microsoft is at pay parity when comparing women and people of color doing equal work with men or white workers"

Are you dumb? They need to increase the # of minorities in higher ranking positions, not pay lower level positions more.

2

dudeedud4 t1_iu9rfjz wrote

So put them there because they are minority? LOP No. You get put if yku are a good fit for that role. Sure you can say i'm ignorant, but that doesn't excuse that news agencies are increasingly putting this type of non-issue in headlines to drum up race baiting.

4

BarrySix t1_iu9ned6 wrote

You are proposing equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. The difference is pretty significant.

3

MyPacman t1_iuakywh wrote

Being on the rung below is not equality of opportunity.

When the outcome regularly has the guy who works 80+ Hours, goes golfing with the boss, or has some other 'in' to socialising with him, then that is not equality of opportunity.

0

BarrySix t1_iucjx75 wrote

Sadly it's not simple to measure equality of opportunity. You can't say "there are fewer male nurses therefore there isn't equality of opportunity".

It's very easy to measure equality of outcome, which is why it's so common to use it as some kind of proxy for equality of opportunity.

2

sirbruce t1_iu9s120 wrote

> They need to increase the # of minorities in higher ranking positions.

Do they? Even minorities are being paid the same as majorities at every level, then the only reason for the overall pay disparity is that there are more majorities employed than minorities. Which is going to be true for as long as they are minorities. Why should they be represented disproportionally relative to overall population?

2

Theyna t1_iu9u5um wrote

"In 2020, Black men and women accounted for 5.6 percent of executives we identified. But despite finding 56 Black executives in 2021 vs 38 in 2020, the percentage dropped to 4.5 percent. The overall U.S. population is 13.4 percent Black, according to the Census Bureau.

We also identified more executives who were either Hispanic or Asian. They accounted for 6 percent of executives in 2020 and that number rose to 7.1 percent this year. U.S. Census Bureau identified 5.9 percent of the U.S. population as Asian and 18.5 percent as Hispanic or Latino"

https://washingtontechnology.com/2021/06/top-100-diversity-shows-little-improvement/359301/

They are NOT represented proportionally relative to the overall population. 4.5% Black executives to 13.4% of the population. 7.1% Asian/Latino executives relative to 24.4% of the population. 26.7% Women executives to 50.8% of the population. Would you like me to go on?

−1

sirbruce t1_iua20yu wrote

Yes, I'd like you to go on. Even if Blacks were 13.4% of each level of pay, there would still be an overall pay disparity. So I'd like you to explain what you would suggest doing at that point.

−4

BarrySix t1_iu9mu8e wrote

Are they really comparing like for like jobs though?

It's more sensible to move everyone's party to the average, rather than moving a bunch of overpaid people to more extremely overpaid.

−1