Google Pay Equity Analysis Results in $9.7 Million in Adjustments

cageymaru

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,968
In 2018, Google included 91% of Google employees in its annual pay equity analysis that covers all job groups that meet minimum n-count thresholds for statistical analysis. Google's annual compensation planning process includes modeling algorithmically each employee's compensation based on work-related inputs like the market rate for their job, their location, level and performance rating. This allows the company to equally compensate employees equitably across gender and racial lines. Any significant discrepancies are handled with a pay raise as compensation.

Google made $9.7 million in adjustments to 10,677 Google employees after the 2018 analysis. The main group that was flagged to receive adjustments were men in the Level 4 Software Engineer career. Google said men received less discretionary funds than women in that career path. 49% of total dollars spent on adjustments went to new hires. Google's next goal is to create a leveling equity analysis to assess how employees are leveled when they are hired and improve how they level. The Washington Post says Google is embroiled in a lawsuit that alleges the tech giant discriminates against women.

Our pay equity analysis ensures that compensation is fair for employees in the same job, at the same level, location and performance. But we know that's only part of the story. Because leveling, performance ratings, and promotion impact pay, this year, we are undertaking a comprehensive review of these processes to make sure the outcomes are fair and equitable for all employees.
 
You know how the argument for the wage gap myth was that if women really did make less for doing the exact same job, why not hire all women? Well, now we know why Google hires mostly men for development positions :p

Seriously though, there's not enough information in the article to really come to any conclusion. Yeah, it's only a $900 difference, which really isn't much. And what about Simpson's Paradox? It could potentially be the case that even based on percentages, everyone was equally unpaid, regardless of sex, race, etc.

You know what Mark Twain said about statistics after all.
 
Last edited:
cageymaru said:
The main group that was flagged to receive adjustments were men
Click to expand...
the-irony-22468156.png
 
Nytegard said:
You know how the argument for the wage gap myth was that if women really did make less for doing the exact same job, why not hire all women? Well, now we know why Google hires mostly men for development positions :p

Seriously though, there's not enough information in the article to really come to any conclusion. Yeah, it's only a $900 difference, which really isn't much. And what about Simpson's Paradox? It could potentially be the case that even based on percentages, everyone was equally unpaid, regardless of sex, race, etc.

You know what Mark Twain said about statistics after all.
Click to expand...


It is not a myth though (studied labor economics at UWM). Most IT places still pay males 10-30% higher even if they have equal skills. I do think men (from being a lead) wine the most and complain the most and therefore get greased/largest wage increases lol. The ladies on my team were often higher performers (I didn't control wages) and much easier to work with (not pansies/complain about everything). I did work with some entitled dudes that lived at moms house way to long.
 
oROEchimaru said:
It is not a myth though (studied labor economics at UWM). Most IT places still pay males 10-30% higher even if they have equal skills. I do think men (from being a lead) wine the most and complain the most and therefore get greased/largest wage increases lol. The ladies on my team were often higher performers (I didn't control wages) and much easier to work with (not pansies/complain about everything). I did work with some entitled dudes that lived at moms house way to long.
Click to expand...

There's more to consider than just skills though. I would be surprised to find that the males didn't work at least 10-30% more and took less days off and were overall more reliable when needed on short notice. Sure women can be and do all that, but on average men generally work more and put their jobs first, where women on average tend to put family and their health first. A salary is based on your overall worth to a company, not just your skill set.

In this day and age though I would be surprised to find large progressive companies like Google pay women less. I suspect they intentionally pay them more because they truly think they are making up for a wage gap.
 
mediumraresteak said:
Ageist algorithm /s
Click to expand...
FTFY. :p

Most of the adjustments went to new hires whom with a tech company tend to be younger-people. So younger people were getting "underpaid" compared to their "older peers" and then were given more money.

The funny part is the "older peers" usually get paid more because they've been with the company longer, shown loyalty to the company, helped build it up over a period of years and completed multiple projects from start to finish, gaining valuable experience, survived multiple downsizings and earned their increased salaries through trial and tribulation. Plus, they've had to work hard to keep their skills current.

So to just give raises to the new younger guys and gals on staff, who hasn't been there for years or shown much loyalty yet building the company up, is somewhat...ageist against the more experienced workers if anything.

The exception to this line of thinking is if Google's New Hires were all in their 40s-60s and they hired no new grads.
 
WBurchnall said:
The exception to this line of thinking is if Google's New Hires were all in their 40s-60s and they hired no new grads.
Click to expand...

The other exception is taking a stance that skill quality and loyalty take a backseat to equality and mediocrity. If everyone makes the same, everyone can be controlled equally. I seem to recall a Silicon Valley commercial from 1984 where a Hooters waitress throws a hammer at a screen to stop that sort of nonsense. I guess we've gone full circle.
 
Velocity said:
The other exception is taking a stance that skill quality and loyalty take a backseat to equality and mediocrity. If everyone makes the same, everyone can be controlled equally. I seem to recall a Silicon Valley commercial from 1984 where a Hooters waitress throws a hammer at a screen to stop that sort of nonsense. I guess we've gone full circle.
Click to expand...

It sort of makes sense though. I mean, how can you really impartially judge a person's technical skill? Maybe a manager places two new hires they know nothing about in two different sections. One does backend stuff behind the scenes, which in itself brings in no money. The other works on a product that's a cash cow. I can certainly see a bonus for the latter person, but should they be paid more? Are they more technically competent than the former?

It's one complaint I see all the time. Managers misplace and incorrectly value their skilled employees all the time. Why should luck of the draw affect salary?
 
I've worked in IT most of my adult life. There have always been a few women, but always the minority. I reflect back to my days in college - how many women were in my computer science classes? I can only recall a few. (I felt sorry for the few - it was probably like being a light bulb surrounded by insects).
In my last job, I was a hiring manager. We were strongly encouraged to interview any female applicants. TBH, I rarely saw many resumes from females. I don't think the pool of applicants exist...
 
oROEchimaru said:
It is not a myth though (studied labor economics at UWM). Most IT places still pay males 10-30% higher even if they have equal skills. I do think men (from being a lead) wine the most and complain the most and therefore get greased/largest wage increases lol. The ladies on my team were often higher performers (I didn't control wages) and much easier to work with (not pansies/complain about everything). I did work with some entitled dudes that lived at moms house way to long.
Click to expand...
This is an absolute lie, both categorically and especially in any case where overtime work is concerned where men on average work far longer unpaid or paid. The fact that you shit on males so happily and and laud females in this bizarro fashion tells me you are a SIMP of the highest order or a Feminist yourself.
 
steakman1971 said:
I've worked in IT most of my adult life. There have always been a few women, but always the minority. I reflect back to my days in college - how many women were in my computer science classes? I can only recall a few. (I felt sorry for the few - it was probably like being a light bulb surrounded by insects).
In my last job, I was a hiring manager. We were strongly encouraged to interview any female applicants. TBH, I rarely saw many resumes from females. I don't think the pool of applicants exist...
Click to expand...
In college I had two females in one of my networking classes. They both quit because they found it boring and uninteresting.
 
oROEchimaru said:
It is not a myth though (studied labor economics at UWM). Most IT places still pay males 10-30% higher even if they have equal skills. I do think men (from being a lead) wine the most and complain the most and therefore get greased/largest wage increases lol. The ladies on my team were often higher performers (I didn't control wages) and much easier to work with (not pansies/complain about everything). I did work with some entitled dudes that lived at moms house way to long.
Click to expand...

I have not seen this at all in my career. Not to say it doenst happen but so far most of what I have seen in the past 10 years is men not getting promoted or even hired in favor or women. Women tend to hire mostly women and promote mostly women based on what I have seen so far.

Last year every single promotee in my company was a woman....

BasicCandor said:
In college I had two females in one of my networking classes. They both quit because they found it boring and uninteresting.
Click to expand...

There were two (very hot) women in my AI class. Both ultimately quit. One slept pretty much everyone in the class trying to get them to do her work for her...and the other one...well she quit after I refused to let her cheat off me lol.
 
oROEchimaru said:
It is not a myth though (studied labor economics at UWM). Most IT places still pay males 10-30% higher even if they have equal skills. I do think men (from being a lead) wine the most and complain the most and therefore get greased/largest wage increases lol. The ladies on my team were often higher performers (I didn't control wages) and much easier to work with (not pansies/complain about everything). I did work with some entitled dudes that lived at moms house way to long.
Click to expand...

I have never seen this during my career, maybe its the wording in your post though, everyone I know doing the same job gets paid the same. Regardless of there actual skill set. There was a big hoohaa in the UK not long ago, and the report into wages was very quickly buried when they realised that there was nothing to report, people in the same job were paid the same.

Before that, they were trying to say Women were paid less by comparing the total Salary of all Women compared to Men, without taking into account that there is much fewer Woman in those roles, and the role they were doing. You can see that here: https://gender-pay-gap.service.gov.uk/Employer/dFbkAijd/2017

You can see what google said about this here: https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/diversity.google/en//pdf/UK-gender-pay-report-2017.pdf

Based on these analyses and adjustments, we have zero statistically significant pay differences globally.
Click to expand...

All companies with 250 or more employees in the UK must publicly disclose their own gender pay gap figures annually, by comparing the average pay for all men to the average pay for all women, without accounting for job type, tenure, location or performance ratings.
Click to expand...

To be frank, the complaint that women are not paid equally has been nothing but utter bullS*ht (In my experience)
 
  • Like
Reactions: kju1
like this
kju1 said:
I have not seen this at all in my career. Not to say it doenst happen but so far most of what I have seen in the past 10 years is men not getting promoted or even hired in favor or women. Women tend to hire mostly women and promote mostly women based on what I have seen so far.

Last year every single promotee in my company was a woman....



There were two (very hot) women in my AI class. Both ultimately quit. One slept pretty much everyone in the class trying to get them to do her work for her...and the other one...well she quit after I refused to let her cheat off me lol.
Click to expand...
So you are saying all women are cheaters or sluts

You dirty manwhore hebitch

:D
 
WBurchnall said:
FTFY. :p

Most of the adjustments went to new hires whom with a tech company tend to be younger-people. So younger people were getting "underpaid" compared to their "older peers" and then were given more money.

The funny part is the "older peers" usually get paid more because they've been with the company longer, shown loyalty to the company, helped build it up over a period of years and completed multiple projects from start to finish, gaining valuable experience, survived multiple downsizings and earned their increased salaries through trial and tribulation. Plus, they've had to work hard to keep their skills current.

So to just give raises to the new younger guys and gals on staff, who hasn't been there for years or shown much loyalty yet building the company up, is somewhat...ageist against the more experienced workers if anything.

The exception to this line of thinking is if Google's New Hires were all in their 40s-60s and they hired no new grads.
Click to expand...

did we read the same thing?
im not discounting that those who had their wages adjusted were new.... but... your comments do not really reflect what is being reported and it seems like you are skewing the story a bit here?
 
People are worth what they will accept as pay and the goal of any business is to keep expenses low. Want to make sure your co worker makes the same, then join a union where it's set in stone.
 
Gideon said:
People are worth what they will accept as pay and the goal of any business is to keep expenses low. Want to make sure your co worker makes the same, then join a union where it's set in stone.
Click to expand...
Believe that if you will. If someone suspects their pay is substandard, their morale, loyalty, and their output will adjust accordingly.
 
harbingerofdoom said:
did we read the same thing?
im not discounting that those who had their wages adjusted were new...
Click to expand...
I should hope not since it is directly in the article and even in the summary on hardocp. One could confirm this with only reading the synopsis.
 
oROEchimaru said:
It is not a myth though (studied labor economics at UWM). Most IT places still pay males 10-30% higher even if they have equal skills. I do think men (from being a lead) wine the most and complain the most and therefore get greased/largest wage increases lol. The ladies on my team were often higher performers (I didn't control wages) and much easier to work with (not pansies/complain about everything). I did work with some entitled dudes that lived at moms house way to long.
Click to expand...

It is absolutely a myth and keeps getting proven over and over and over. Every single time a study is done attempting to prove the "wage gap", it ends up either finding no wage gap or like here that men are actually the ones getting underpaid and increasing their pay. The whole wage gap nonsense started when a handful of man hating intersectional feminists spent a bunch of time cherry picking data to push their agenda. The wage gap has never been proven, and never will be proven because it simply doesn't exist.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
It is absolutely a myth and keeps getting proven over and over and over. Every single time a study is done attempting to prove the "wage gap", it ends up either finding no wage gap or like here that men are actually the ones getting underpaid and increasing their pay. The whole wage gap nonsense started when a handful of man hating intersectional feminists spent a bunch of time cherry picking data to push their agenda. The wage gap has never been proven, and never will be proven because it simply doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

Wait you mean special interest people manipulate studies to show what they want to see? Say it isn't so! Reminds me of the vaccine discussion...
 
cageymaru said:
The main group that was flagged to receive adjustments were men in the Level 4 Software Engineer career. Google said men received less discretionary funds than women in that career path.
Click to expand...

I've seen some of the women in the category. Some need a bigger paycheck for new rack hardware.
 
I will sound dumb, but what is a summary of the work a software engineer does at Google? Are they in teams that make something like Allo or Duo? Or refreshing Gmail on iOS which looks worse to me.
 
singe_101 said:
I will sound dumb, but what is a summary of the work a software engineer does at Google? Are they in teams that make something like Allo or Duo? Or refreshing Gmail on iOS which looks worse to me.
Click to expand...

They write code for google products. Nest, Duo, GMail etc. The managers talk to customers so the engineers dont have to. (sorry couldnt resist that one)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top