Apple Engineering Leader Handling 5G Efforts Leaves Company

[techwhiz]

Every point you make is extremely rational and on point with current research on the topic.

One has to question how much actual diversity do companies in the Bay area and San Fran really have. The majority of 'migrants' are from India alone, or a handful of other developing economies. That is not representative of diversity. It's a cheap labor force and what has created ManJose.

Places like London, Sydney, Melbourne, Vancouver have diversity. People in these thriving and highly livable cities come from all walks of life and regions of the world. That's where I would be setting up if I was a company. They're already punch way above their weight class in R&D, for things that actually matter in life, like medical research; versus emojis and other get-rich-quick schemes.

For me personally, not even a $300k salary would get me to move to the Bay Area or San Fran. I vote D but the culture is just too diehard quasi-liberal/libertarian out there. It's very off putting to anyone else.

This perpetuates the cycle of only having one type of mindset and background, something that will inevitable catch up to the area and allow others to overtake.

The funny thing is I don't need to read the research. I am the research.
That's the point, it's not diverse. You end up with the homogeneous enclaves in companies that actually fight against diversity based on internal bias.

Culturally, men from various cultures/nationalities have a propensity to think less of women engineers and engineers of different nationalities. That drives the "look like me", "think like me" mentality that pushes against a well rounded and diverse work force. You get engineers that have no business in management roles and are there because they were good engineers. Good engineers do not necessarily make good managers. Actually the opposite is true more often than not a good engineer makes a horrible manager because they lack the interpersonal and people skills.

I'm in the Bay Area because I was born here. I work in Silicon Valley but do not live in the Valley.
I live where there is some real diversity in the East Bay near Oakland/San Leandro/Hayward areas.
I couldn't live in the South Bay. I just couldn't.

Unless companies take a serious look at diversity and not the cheap labor pool we are destined to have a less diverse workforce in science and technology not a more diverse workforce.
[doublepost=1556822331][/doublepost]

Two of the top 5 engineers I ever worked with are women. For women to end up in an engineering degree despite all the crap they go through being discouraged by teachers in high school and college, etc., they have to have way-above-average dedication, and it shows.

I agree. Some of the best engineers I have worked with have been women.
And you are right. They have to be twice as good because they are perceived as less.
Same with black, Native American and Hispanic engineers.
As a non-white, non-Asian, non-Indian engineer in Silicon Valley, I have my challenges.
Often when people walk into the room, I'm the last person they introduce themselves to, even when I'm closest to them or the door. They then find out I'm the decision maker in the room and the looks on the faces can't be described as anything but "Classic". You can see the "oh crap" look on their faces.

It's entertaining at some level but just plain old.

Not to beat a dead horse or make this a hot discussion but H1-B the way it's implemented has not helped. The IEEE and GAO have talked about the defects in the system for at least two decades. American technology companies have become addicted to cheap, imported labor and rely on that labor instead of funding education at the middle and high school level to attract the best and the brightest we have to those demanding STEM fields.

I think that for every H1-B that a company gets, they need to invest 50% of the take-home salary for that person into American STEM education at the middle and high school level. If after 2-3 years they still claim to need the H1-B, it rises to 75% for the next two years, then 100% after that. Let's make sure there is a shortage and the person is critical. If the person is that critical, then prove it.

I've seen too many postings where the description is so narrow you can only hire one person. I've seen that for decades in the valley. Crafting a job description based on the resume of the candidate they want to hire.

Anyway. I've been here a long time and seen a whole lot.

 

[cmaier]

The funny thing is I don't need to read the research. I am the research.
That's the point, it's not diverse. You end up with the homogeneous enclaves in companies that actually fight against diversity based on internal bias.

Culturally, men from various cultures/nationalities have a propensity to think less of women engineers and engineers of different nationalities. That drives the "look like me", "think like me" mentality that pushes against a well rounded and diverse work force. You get engineers that have no business in management roles and are there because they were good engineers. Good engineers do not necessarily make good managers. Actually the opposite is true more often than not a good engineer makes a horrible manager because they lack the interpersonal and people skills.

I'm in the Bay Area because I was born here. I work in Silicon Valley but do not live in the Valley.
I live where there is some real diversity in the East Bay near Oakland/San Leandro/Hayward areas.
I couldn't live in the South Bay. I just couldn't.

Unless companies take a serious look at diversity and not the cheap labor pool we are destined to have a less diverse workforce in science and technology not a more diverse workforce.
[doublepost=1556822331][/doublepost]

I agree. Some of the best engineers I have worked with have been women.
And you are right. They have to be twice as good because they are perceived as less.
Same with black, Native American and Hispanic engineers.
As a non-white, non-Asian, non-Indian engineer in Silicon Valley, I have my challenges.
Often when people walk into the room, I'm the last person they introduce themselves to, even when I'm closest to them or the door. They then find out I'm the decision maker in the room and the looks on the faces can't be described as anything but "Classic". You can see the "oh crap" look on their faces.

It's entertaining at some level but just plain old.

Not to beat a dead horse or make this a hot discussion but H1-B the way it's implemented has not helped. The IEEE and GAO have talked about the defects in the system for at least two decades. American technology companies have become addicted to cheap, imported labor and rely on that labor instead of funding education at the middle and high school level to attract the best and the brightest we have to those demanding STEM fields.

I think that for every H1-B that a company gets, they need to invest 50% of the take-home salary for that person into American STEM education at the middle and high school level. If after 2-3 years they still claim to need the H1-B, it rises to 75% for the next two years, then 100% after that. Let's make sure there is a shortage and the person is critical. If the person is that critical, then prove it.

I've seen too many postings where the description is so narrow you can only hire one person. I've seen that for decades in the valley. Crafting a job description based on the resume of the candidate they want to hire.

Anyway. I've been here a long time and seen a whole lot.

H1B is what got me to quit the industry. I figured I can be as productive as, say, 3 cheap foreigners. But not 5 who can be hired for the same total pay as me. Or even worse for foreign outsourcing.