Intel's diversity numbers are out – and that 'push' has become more of a 'gentle nudge' Intel says it is still on track to meet its 2020 workplace diversity targets even as the pace of its efforts to include women and underrepresented minorities slowed. Chipzilla said that its mid-year employee statistics, published today, showed it will hit full representation – having a workforce that reflects the gender and …
According to the Wikipedia page for United_States the majority race is 'white' and there is no mention of the percentage presumably they are not a minority. The numbers suggest that the percentage of women on Intel's staff is increasing, the fraction of men decreasing, and transgenders, neuters, hermaphrodites, bisexuals, asexuals etc. remain a minor minority.
Two things strike me here.
1) In a company whose staff is actually shrinking (https://www.statista.com/statistics/263567/employees-at-intel-since-2004/), you can only replace leavers. You can't go on a massive hiring boost to pad numbers and demographics. And many of those leaving will also be in this cryptic URM group.
2) You can only hire from the available pool of job-seekers. It's been bemoaned time and time again that technology education is shockingly under-attended by women, for example. I don't know the stats by race (and being in the privileged position of white, middle-aged male, it's not something I've felt compelled to actively seek out, to be honest), but if I'm interviewing for the same post at the same salary and one candidate is massively more educated and qualified than the other, I'll go with the qualifications regardless of race or gender. The problem needs fixed from below, and that is something that Intel can have a hand in changing, but it takes time.
As a footnote, I'd like to hope that these groups are being represented evenly(ish) across the spectrum of (shall we say) "job prestige". It's no good having all the managers white/asian, all the janitors latino, and then celebrating "diversity" - you've just reinforced Alphas and Epsilons...
When the workforce is shrinking you can adjust ratios by only laying off the white males, same as hiring just the other way around. And probably just as illegal. It's what my boss did, with a generous "don't sue us, don't talk about it" payment.
In hiring you refuse to consider any applicants until you get the minorities you want, randomly discard until you get a set with the ratios you want and then interview from what you consider your representative set and hire the best from that group. Also odious. But convoluted enough that it's impossible to prove discrimination without a paper trail.
This sort of thing is becoming common, almost routine, in some organisations. Eventually it'll become culturally accepted and then the law will change.
By "Asian" are they referring to the US meaning of Asian which tends to refer to what the Brits often call Oriental, or the Brit version which tends to refer to the ares of India / Pakistan / Bangladesh, or the geographical version which would include both of the above + Mongolia, large parts of Russia and the Middle east and many other countries?
They'll be using the U.S. Census Bureau's definitions: https://www.census.gov/topics/population/race/about.html
"Asian" means both Oriental and Subcontinental (India/Pakistan), but not Middle-Eastern (they count as White).
"White" includes Europe, North Africa, and the Middle-East.
What has Intel done about employing proportionate numbers of very stupid people? (Who used to be officially called "morons", "cretins" and other such unpleasant names, before it became mandatory to refer to them as the "differently-mentally-abled").
All large corporations have a lot of very highly paid jerks, and the mentally-differently-abled could be absorbed into their ranks without much noticeable impact. It's not as if they do anything useful or important.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
