HN Explorer

5 comments

[ 5.1 ms ] story [ 17.8 ms ] thread
smt88
I was disappointed by the lack of substance here. It's just a PR puff piece.

I'd be much more interested in learning what Gusto changed (if anything) and how it changed their applicant pool.

Were 50% of the applicants female? Was there a significant quality difference between genders or across time?

mattbillenstein
How did you accomplish this? Aggressive screening by gender at each phase of the hiring pipeline or just at the resume phase?
angersock
> Aggressive screening by gender

That strikes me as somewhat euphemistic.

mattbillenstein
Assuming the pool is 80-90% male to start, to get to 50% I think one would have to be "aggressive" -- don't you?
smt88
I think GP meant that "aggressive screening by gender" is another way of saying "discrimination". In the US, I think that's technically true -- you can end up with a very different pool of hires than applicants, but you're vulnerable to lawsuits forcing you to defend the merit of the ones who were hired.