https://www.forbes.com/sites/morgansimon/2019/01/28/what-mig...
It's actually very complicated, because there were a lot of backroom deals between the two major races to make it not look like racism.
I appreciate your intent in trying to re-balance against prejudice.
I also appreciate you helping out candidates with good advice, when you do it. That's what we should do for all colleagues, before, during, and after interviews, as mutually-supportive people of goodwill. And doing it more in some cases makes sense.
I'm concerned about a pattern of racism you allege, and that sounds like something to investigate. I believe there's ample data that could be looked at. I don't know about your organization, but, some places, it would be politically safe to raise this important concern with your manager or HR. It's not a happy thing to look for, but looking for it, and figuring out how to fix any problems that appear, is the right thing to do (for the organization, and for greater society).
The other side of that concern is that you seem to be singling out another labeled group, and stereotyping over them. That doesn't sound fair to that group, nor to all the individuals within it. I think that good practice for fighting injustice includes striving to improve things everywhere, including root causes -- not thinking only of the injustices with which we are most immediately familiar.
The automatic stellar feedback might be a concern. I'm sure there's room for subjectivity, discretion, and holistic assessments, and maybe your stellar feedback fits within that. When I've given boosts to less-advantaged candidates (for various reasons, including "undiscovered diamonds in the rough"), I've been upfront with my peers and superiors about that. A big part of our job as engineers is to give characterizations and counsel, and, when we have something important to say, we want to be respected and taken seriously.
I'm Asian, worked at FANG, have never discriminated against someone based on their ethnicity and frankly find your actions shortsided and regressive. You're fighting perceived racism with actual racism.
No one think they have ever discriminated against someone based on ethnicity. Even Donald Trump sincerely believes in his heart of hearts that he is the least racist person who has ever walked this good earth. But actions speak louder than words, and my real life experiences are not 'perceived', nor are the results. If a black candidate has two Asian interviewers in a loop, chances of hire are nil, no matter the skill of the candidate. This is based on a sample of ~15-20. I really wish tech companies collected data about the ethnic background of both the interviewers, candidates and the results to clearly illuminate this glaring problem, otherwise everything I say is anecdotal/heresay.
Even speaking for myself, when I've interviewed the only places I've received offers were during loops where there was a max of one asian interviewer.
As for your first question, I'm getting into murky waters but I'll admit that it is difficult to put aside the fact that every Asian you hire, makes it harder for another black candidate to get hired. But it's definitely not as simple as rejecting every asian candidate, definitely don't want to leave a pattern behind :)
This has to be Poe's law. This is incredibly racist.
The grand parent said he was getting into "murky waters" but in fact he is fully submerged in the deep end of racism.
I wish there was a tactful way of requesting non-Indian interviewers, but there really isn't. There is no bigger waste of time than when you receive an interview schedule and see the names of the interviewers and 4/5 are Indian. Earlier in my career I'd go for the practice but I wouldn't even bother now tbh.
On a serious note, to keep a long winded answer short, I'm well aware of the phenomena that your mindset does indeed effect your behaviour/signals you put out and that in turn does effect how people treat you, and mindset is not something that can easily be faked. I've always been hyper conscious about this going into interviews and have even paid for some in-person mock interviews at some point in my career during a rough patch to spot any anomalies/negative vibes I may be giving off.
For an iota of what it is worth, I _genuinely_ am happy to see black candidates. If anything I have a heightened sense of fairness and post interview I offer to spend extended time to attune them to the next interview rounds. In case I do happen to reject the candidate, I offer to write elaborate review from my notes (I take a lot of notes) with the hope it helps the candidate. Again, sorry.
If asked, I would strongly deny being even remotely sexist. Ironically, if I were in a position to hire or promote a female candidate or employee, I might be unreasonably biased toward the notion on account of wanting to have a diverse team. But in the aforementioned scenario I was caught inside of my own projections of an invisible pecking order.
The prospect that there are people who might have a similar reaction to my asserting myself while being a black man frightened me. I ruminated over past interactions, framing them in a completely different context.
Trying to make it in this industry has created a certain amount of anxiety and resentment, and it's compounded by the fact that I don't know which parts of it are my imagination or reality. I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to argue that everyone is prejudiced toward me, but rather my own constant uncertainty of how I'm perceived is both alienating and discouraging.
FAANGs are still American companies. They didn't check their historical baggage at the door.
edit: op edited post so this response looks a little off.
https://www.brightworkresearch.com/enterprisesoftwarepolicy/...
When a police officer forces me to hand the bag of cash back to the cashier, it isn't robbery.
Motives and circumstances matter.
> America's "historical baggage"? As if every other nation on Earth doesn't have similar historical baggage.
Other countries' transgressions don't absolve the US', in the same way that other people's crimes don't absolve all criminals. And while there are probably few people that never break any laws, there's still a difference between murderers and jaywalkers. For countries, there are obviously small countries that avoided committing atrocities just by a lack of opportunity. There are recently formed countries that enjoy what for Germans born after 1945 is called "the good luck of being born late". And even among larger countries with long and sometimes dark histories, not all injustice is equal: it's plainly possible to see the injustice of France's conduct in Algeria while still acknowledging it pales in comparison to the Shoah.
In the world today the most racist nations are not the developed nations, but large parts of Southeast Asia, Africa and South America.
For my part, I’ve had several unpleasant “oh, now that it’s just us Asians here let me tell you what I think” moments over the years.
Maybe if it was, “Now that it’s just us Koreans, or Chinese, or Indians,” then maybe.
From my experience, Asian Americans are extremely progressive.
Only slightly. Very strong candidates will more than likely get a pass, but those are exceedingly rare and haven't seen one yet tbh. It's the majority who are genuinely borderline/just above average who will never get a pass/given benefit of the doubt that are given to others.