Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't think anyone expects them to be overlooked. You look at the person and you see if they've changed for the better.

I would much rather hire someone who grew up poor and fell in with gangs and felt pressured to join in an armed robbery 10 years ago and understands that it's wrong than someone who had a demonstrated bias against some minority 10 years ago and still does today. This isn't about whether they're a "good person" or anything, this is a mercenary calculation based on business value. I don't expect the former gang member is going to engage in similar violent crimes if I employ them. I do expect the biased person is going to have trouble working productively with people in my company who are part of that minority or is going to negatively impact those folks' productivity.

I'm not in the business of determining the magnitude of your moral transgressions. That stays in the confessional. I'm in the business of hiring folks who will deliver business value.



I think there's a wide gulf between "said something that someone on the internet construed as racist" and "demonstrated bias against some minority"...

But past that, the general principle you advocate seems to be "try not to hire people who will not be able to work with others", right? It doesn't matter whether they're biased against minorities or non-minorities, as long as they're biased and will be acting irrationally in ways that piss off those around them.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: