posted 17 years ago
I have a problem with the argument that you shouldn't discriminate in hiring on the basis of race, age, or gender because you may miss out on a good employee. It may be true, but the reason managers shouldn't discriminate is that it's illegal and it's bad for society as a whole (which is why it's illegal).
The famous Woolworth's lunch counter in North Carolina may have lost most of its white customers after ending racial discrimination, but that doesn't change the law or morality. There are plenty of things that are both profitable and dead wrong (bank robbery for instance).
In the thin US IT job market, employers may prefer younger workers because they use less health insurance, take fewer sick days, and don't know how to stand up for their rights in the workplace. These are rational economic arguments. That doesn't make age discrimination right.
Employers may prefer men and single women because they can pull all-nighters when necessary and have fewer demands on their time. This is perfectly logical and completely wrong.
Until around 2001, IT hiring typically went through a set of formal processes monitored by Human Resources specialists. A job description was approved, hiring criteria were defined, candidates were sourced through recruiters and advertising, and the selections for interviews and job offers were based on stated objective and subjective criteria.
Today, scarce US IT jobs are given out on the buddy system. Job seekers are expected to prevail on friends, friends of friends, etc., for a shot at a scarce job that is never posted, advertised, or even formally approved before it is filled. HR gets involved after the boss's friend's friend has already been selected. Now some managers are just plain fair and decent, but human nature suggests that hiring in the shadows often leads to shadowy results.
There are still some scarce IT job categories, such as programmers with many years of experience on specific, high demand languages using specific, popular server software, but every year makes the entire work force one year more experienced. Eventually, every hire will be a personal favor.
The only answer would be aggressive enforcement of the employment discrimination laws, but I don't see that happening.
Mike Gershman
SCJP 1.4, SCWCD in process