
Pay disparities against women at Google are systemic, labor department testifies - wonderous
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/07/google-pay-disparities-women-labor-department-lawsuit
======
tyingq
US govt: _" The government’s analysis at this point indicates that
discrimination against women in Google is quite extreme, even in this
industry.”_

Google: _" Every year, we do a comprehensive and robust analysis of pay across
genders and we have found no gender pay gap"_

I expected different takes from both sides, but this is diametrically opposed.
Should be interesting when the data comes out.

------
SamReidHughes
Google pays everybody as little as it can get away with. Apparently this is
illegal.

------
pottersbasilisk
Amazing, I just saw the pay gap video a couple days they had on their
homepage. What a bunch of hypocrites!

------
belovedeagle
And according to the article the DoL has provided no evidence of this
extraordinary claim. But of course since the headline is framed as a[n
indirect] quote, the Guardian supposedly can't be accused of spreading fake
news if it turns out that the DoL is full of shit. How convenient.

~~~
YeGoblynQueenne
According to the article, the DoL has found pay discrepancies and wants more
data to confirm its findings. From the article:

 _Herold added: “The government’s analysis at this point indicates that
discrimination against women in Google is quite extreme, even in this
industry.”_

 _Wipper said the department found pay disparities in a 2015 snapshot of
salaries and said officials needed earlier compensation data to evaluate the
root of the problem and needed to be able to confidentially interview
employees._

 _“We want to understand what’s causing the disparity,” she said._

 _Herold told the Guardian that the department “seeks additional information
to ensure the accuracy of the department’s findings, because if the findings
are confirmed, this is a troubling situation”._

~~~
belovedeagle
You are incorrect. According to the article, _according to DoL_ , the DoL has
found etc. There is a big difference, and my original statement is the correct
one assuming that the Guardian is being truthful (which they probably are). If
the DoL had provided evidence then the Guardian themselves would state that
the DoL has found this evidence. You can't go to court and tell the judge
and/or jury, "I found such-and-such evidence which proves that Google
discriminates!", you have to actually provide that evidence.

~~~
YeGoblynQueenne
On a separate note, could we have a web-rule, like Godwin's Law, to address a
certain tendency to comment on the logic of peoples' comments, in the
abstract? Sometimes I feel like I'm in the Stoa debating Socrates, not on a
web board exchanging opinions with some dude/s/s, the way I'm told my
"argument is illogical" or my "statement is incorrect" etc.

Here, I'll make a stab at it myself:

YeGoblynQueenne's Law of Debugging Arguments: _as the length of an internet
conversation approaches infinity, the probability that someone will mention
the words "argument" and "incorrect" (or their cognates) in the same comment
tends to become 1.0_.

~~~
belovedeagle
I dunno; if you think that this is mere "exchange of opinions" where facts
don't matter and people can just make shit up (I'm not saying you are, but
that's the natural conclusion of such an attitude) then it's not surprising if
you're involved in a lot of conversations in which the counterparty uses the
words "argument" and "incorrect". Kind of like if I notice a lot of people I'm
talking to are using the words "where" and "your" and "pants" in close
proximity, I'm going to start wondering if I maybe forgot to do something this
morning. It's ridiculous to come up with a theory that maybe people are just
weird and like talking about pants.

~~~
idunnodoyou
Yep...exactly. All in due time, ehhh? So, after familiarizing one's self with
the dialog then apparently one must direct their target audience accordingly.
See how easy that is? Also, I don't think this is "merely an exchange of
opinions". I "think" this has turned into a hate campaign between both sides
of the debate and perhaps it would be more beneficial if you all BOTH stuck to
the facts but obviously neither side is capable of doing so... this is a
perfect example right here...this online hate campaign against me is futile to
say the least. I mean what have you internet warriors actually accomplished
and/or how has it been beneficial to your anti-bsl campaign?
NADA...ZIP...ZILCH. What have you learned exactly about me that has been such
a "hush hush secret"? Please do share... What conspiracy theory do you all
have for me now, huh? Let me make myself very clear bc apparently you all need
things spelled out for you. I post MY personal opinion on my own PERSONAL
timeline of which I have zero 000 friends or acquaintances involved in either
side of this issue. It is YOU people who seek out my posts and monitor my
timeline 24/7\. I mean...how incredibly pathetic??? If you don't like what I
have to say on this issue it's really a simple fix...block my account or maybe
just stop trolling me? Easy...peezy.

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017, 7:00 PM Google Alerts <googlealerts-noreply@google.com>
wrote: Google "I Dunno" WEB I dunno; if you think that this is mere "exchange
of opinions" Hacker News I dunno; if you think that this is mere "exchange of
opinions" where facts don't matter and people can just make shit up (I'm not
saying you are, but ... Google Plus Facebook Twitter Flag as irrelevant See
more results | Edit this alert You have received this email because you have
subscribed to Google Alerts. View all your alerts Send Feedback

