undefined | Better HN

0 pointshaberman7y ago0 comments

> But more importantly, you may find men occupy high salary roles in engineering whilst women work in HR - resulting in the salary changes going disproportionately to men, because a % increase in their salary is far higher than the women on lower salaries.

The article says the opposite with regard to where the salary adjustments went:

> One effect of the adjustments was to create a pronounced imbalance in compensation among lower-level software engineers, one of Google’s largest job groups, with a large number of men identified as being underpaid compared with their female peers. To offset that, further adjustments were made. Google said it saw no pattern in the reasons women were receiving more discretionary pay.

0 comments

YeGoblynQueenne7y ago

The passage you quote makes it clear the disparity is in absolute numbers, not proportions, as your earlier comment suggests.

Btw, note that this passage (that I also quoted yesterday for a comment of my own) is now nowhere to be found in the article, that has been heaviy edited since it was posted on HN.

habermanOP7y ago

> The passage you quote makes it clear the disparity is in absolute numbers, not proportions, as your earlier comment suggests.

It says no such thing. The "large number" of underpaid men is not being compared against the number of underpaid women.

The article still contains these quotes, which clearly establish that the equity pay raises went disproportionately to men:

> The study, which disproportionately led to pay raises for thousands of men [...]

> In response to the study, Google gave $9.7 million in additional compensation to 10,677 employees for this year. Men account for about 69 percent of the company’s work force, but they received a higher percentage of the money.

YeGoblynQueenne7y ago

>> a large number of men identified as being underpaid compared with their female peers

This sentence compares the number of men identified as underpaid to the number of women identified as underpaid.

>> The study, which disproportionately led to pay raises for thousands of men

"Disproportionate" is used to signify something that is "out of proportion", in a lay sense, not in the mathematical sense of the ratio between two numbers. It is not a mathematical term that signifies a comparison between percentages, as your comment seems to suggest.

>> they received a higher percentage of the money.

This says nothing about the proportion of men or women who were found to be underpaid. It refers to the percentage of men who received more money. The justification for that is that there are more men in the company.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointshaberman7y ago0 comments

The article says the opposite with regard to where the salary adjustments went:

0 comments

YeGoblynQueenne7y ago

The passage you quote makes it clear the disparity is in absolute numbers, not proportions, as your earlier comment suggests.

Btw, note that this passage (that I also quoted yesterday for a comment of my own) is now nowhere to be found in the article, that has been heaviy edited since it was posted on HN.

habermanOP7y ago

> The passage you quote makes it clear the disparity is in absolute numbers, not proportions, as your earlier comment suggests.

It says no such thing. The "large number" of underpaid men is not being compared against the number of underpaid women.

The article still contains these quotes, which clearly establish that the equity pay raises went disproportionately to men:

> The study, which disproportionately led to pay raises for thousands of men [...]

YeGoblynQueenne7y ago

>> a large number of men identified as being underpaid compared with their female peers

This sentence compares the number of men identified as underpaid to the number of women identified as underpaid.

>> The study, which disproportionately led to pay raises for thousands of men

>> they received a higher percentage of the money.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse