Google offers $118m to settle gender discrimination lawsuit Google has promised to cough up $118 million to settle a years-long gender-discrimination class-action lawsuit that alleged the internet giant unfairly pays men more than women. The case, launched in 2017, was led by three women, Kelly Ellis, Holly Pease, and Kelli Wisuri, who filed a complaint alleging the search giant hires …
Considering this is Google, $100M is like $3K per female employee (not that they'll all get that, lawyers fees and so on), and 1% of the yearly salary budget. They might well consider it the cost of doing business. In fact, considering it is meant to compensate for many years of paying tens of thousands of women less than men, you could say that either nothing much could be found, or that they got off very lightly.
" as much as $118 million – minus lawyers' fees and other legal costs –"
I was informed that I was a plantif in an overcharging class action lawsuit against AT&T years ago. The class action suit was successful, I honestly don't remember the settlement amount but do remember hearing that dreaded catch phrase "minus lawyers' fees and related costs"
Eventually I got a check in the mail for $0.02.
I said this when it came out, and I'm saying it now. I was at Google during the time in question. Google obsesses over hiring & promotions. Specifically, they obsess about discrimination, with an eye to ensure that there is no discrimination against women or minorities. They also keep insane amounts of data on the subject. Someone ran the numbers once, and oops! Turns out that they were paying men slightly less. Which is a surprise only to people who don't understand random walks.
Google is big. Really big. You just won’t believe how vastly hugely mindboggingly big it is. You might think that $118M is a lot, but to Google, that's just peanuts.
Even so, if I were a senior exec at Alphabet, I would do some checking into just how this offer came to be made. I suspect that someone's friend is getting $30M (in "fees") from Google's shareholders that they are in no way entitled to.
Is this actually a gender issue, or just a tech industry issue?
I cannot count the number of times I have seen a new hire come on board at a pay level greater than the existing headcount (regardless of gender or other protected characteristics).
Management's response? Go to the competition and then re-apply in 6 months, you will get your raise.
alleging the search giant hires women in lower-paying positions compared to men despite them having the same qualifications.
Same qualifications does not equal same skill and experience level.
Female staff are also less likely to get promoted, it was claimed.
To be promoted you have to be assertive, men usually are more aggressive in pursuing promotions and are usually more able to put in overtime as women are generally mkre interested in a gold work-life balance.
You can't expect to have a good work-life balance and still get the promotion (well, you can, but it's not realistic to anyone aside for millenials, who think that no effort is needed, because even without trying they're all special snow flakes and they also have the right to get anything other people, who do put in effort, get.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
