Another white male here - I started back in 2016 and it was majority white / male. That changed. Hiring became more female and diverse w/ regard to race. Leadership / promotions criteria that included a racial and s-x ratio target was rolled out. I thought that reverse racism. Same as another guy said, I got my job because I knew someone - yes, but he was Asian - male - not a white guy. Introduces me to another Asian, male. He introduces me to his white, male managers. Interview and get a job. The company was probably 80% female at the time and 80% white males. The teams I worked on were progressively more female, and diverse as the years rolled by. Eventually my leadership totem pole went from all white male to a few females, all white, and then later lots of black males and white females until you got closer to the top, where it's basically all white males, as I believe it has stayed, with a token female. When I left I think my team was about at what the current 10K diversity statistics show. Clearly, there was an effort to hire more diverse, and female. And to promote into leadership, more females and non white races. That too seemed bizarre to me as our applicant pool profile hadn't really changed over the years. Our hiring had, though. What I learned was we had a 2030 plan - that has now been seared into the 10K report:
By 2030, 50% of our global workforce and 40% of our global people leaders will be those who self-identify as women.
By 2030, 25% of our U.S. workforce and 15% of our U.S. people leaders will be those who self-identify as Black or African American or as
Hispanic or Latino
So this has some interesting effects.
Namely, combined with a 5% overall population reduction (133,000 globally down to 126350) We end up with a current headcount of 83,790 White population, that goes down to 55,594 but the white male population goes from 54,464 to 27,797 or an appx 50% reduction in white males. What the actual f*ck does that say to me, as a white male?
Females make up only 1/4 of the STEM degrees in this country - this is a technology company, mind you. That hires predominately people with degrees. There is also a 10% difference in the workforce participation rate in females and males. This explains why the applicant pool is not 50% - and yet the mandate is for 50% male to female workforce ratio - this is absurd.
There is only a 13.6% population of blacks in the USA. How does a 25% target make any sense logically ? Or more practically, how are they going to find all of these people, specifically black people, to fill all of these roles ? there would almost have to be a race based hiring campaign. It's complete madness when you consider Lady Justice. Blind.
Where it exists here though, it exists everywhere in our industry. That is to say, a hiring plan that looks very closely at your s-x and race. There will be winners here (most obviously blacks, and especially black females) but there will also be losers (most obviously whites, and especially white males).
It is legal ? Doubtful. Is it happening ? You see it in the f*cking 10K.
Merit should be the only hiring criteria / promotion consideration.
I will leave you with only this - SGA can be reduced further, revenue cannot. Shareholders will replace workers with software when there is margin pressure.
Sue the pants off of these f*ckers for violating Title VII if you catch a bullet.
Learn a skill - use the money to start a business w/ your new skill - hire on merit.