Is This Legal?

39 points by larionv ↗ HN
Is this legal? Just received an email from Xoriant about a new Sr. Data Engineer position.

Here are the requirements:

7-10 years of experience. NOT looking for someone with 15+ years. They will NOT be considered. Must have experience with any Graph Database - - client uses Neptune NOT looking for a Data Scientist. MUST be a Data Engineer who does the actual work of getting data into 1 place. AWS experience – implementing graph database in AWS (required experience) Python experience – for data pipelining

I am wondering about "NOT looking for someone with 15+ years. They will NOT be considered."

Can they openly put this requirement into their position requirements?

29 comments

[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 61.2 ms ] thread
IANAL, this seems to be heavily jurisdiction-dependent. For example, I know that it is unlikely that this would be considered age discrimination in Ontario Canada, whereas, it's likely to be considered so in California.
I live in Ontario and I'm curious as to why you think this is unlikely to be considered age discrimination here.
Assuming they’re willing to work for the pay you’re offering, I can’t think of any reason other than age discrimination NOT to want that additional experience.
Well, a data scientist that started working 15 years ago will have a very different skill set...
Not necessarily. Lots of people keep up with changes in their field.
Why do some people seem to assume that experienced people don't keep their skillsets current?

Experienced people know better than less experienced people how important that is.

Likely a skill set that includes self improvement and maintaining relevant knowledge....
Interpretation might vary;

~2013 I responded on twitter about "a dev who has 15 years of experience with PHP" with, a response about why I would be concerned that that could mean the developer never learned the PHP 3 (much less 4) object model.

And if you tell me you have 15 years working with "any" Graph database, that seems like it would have some irrelevancy to the Graph Databases of today.

Of course, it's also possible to "forget" experience, at least on paper and an interview; and changing your resume to do so, may be advantageous as you get older.

The posting seems to be requiring 7-10 years of work experience, not specific to graph databases or any other technology.
But this is where it's subject to interpretation:

-... years of experience, working? Does mowing lawns, serving ice cream in high school count as experience?

-... years experience as a Product Owner?

-... years as a embedded devices software engineer?

-... years as an executive assistant, TA, PostGrad?

It may or may not be intended to discriminate age, but I can't see how to distunguish it from filtering out 'overqualified' candidates from an explicitly tiered position.
Usually salary is used to filter out overqualified candidates.

Oftentimes the salary turns out to be insufficient for any candidate.

I wonder if this is a fake job posting to satisfy a Labor Certification [0] for a US Visa application.

For some types of Visas, the company has to prove that there are no qualified US workers to take the position. One way of proving this is to post a job posting and provide evidence that there are no qualified workers that have applied.

There is of course a perverse incentive to make the job posting extraordinarily specific such that only the intended Visa recipient could be considered qualified.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_certification

If it's illegal, they still need to encounter someone willing to sue them, no?

Maybe you can report them to some non-profit watchdog, who will follow up? But will they catch a real fine or slap on the wrists?

Legality aside, this has a bunch of other red flags all over it. Capitalising the nots and musts is so off-putting.
Why would be illegal for company to want to hire whoever they want to?
That would be discrimination of a person indirectly based on their age (personal characteristic you cannot change), which is a big no no.

In order to be non-discriminatory, a person has to be hired according to their ability to do the job, without consideration to their ethnicity, age, skin color, etc. A language can be learned, so requiring someone to speak specific languages to apply is non-discriminatory.

Not a lawyer. Not legal advice.

It's my understanding language requirements are acceptable - it's a skill required to complete a job and language isn't a protected class, much like age, race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. is in many jurisdictions.

If this is for a job post in the US: It is illegal under U.S. federal law to discriminate against an employee, either intentionally or through a disparate impact, on account of his or her race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information.

US employees who believe they have been discriminated against can file a lawsuit, but it is difficult to prove and historically not viable.

############################################# A quick look at the Xoriant website shows they have operations in the US(mostly NJ and CA) and India. A non-native English speaker who is not familiar with US law could have posted this with good intentions ... but I do not think it is likely.

The job postings on their US website do not have this strange pattern of NOT's and all that mess, but they do have some minor grammatical errors and obvious incomplete sentences. The India careers site is actually much nicer. It has more specific requirements and clear qualifications. There is this sentence with the specific year ranges:

Job Description: Senior Technical Lead - (1800003277)

Role: ... "As an experienced Big Data Technical Lead, you should have 12-16 years of experience in IT, with minimum of 3 years of full-time exposure in projects involving Big Data / Hadoop." ... #############################################

Perhaps they are using some dataset that shows the most successful hires for this job involve people with a certain number of years of experience ... less means "not enough experience - too much effort to train", more means "retiring soon - not worth training"

I don't know of a dataset like this, but it seems likely there is one. I would love to see it! I'm sure many companies do this, but you can't actually say this. You have to keep it to yourself and use it as part of a decision along with other factors. You certainly shouldn't advertise this.

#############################################

Glassdoor gives them a 3.6/5 review. Highest category is work/life balance. 93% approve of the CEO. Most of the employees on here were approached by campus recruiters (39%) or general recruiters (20%). 62% report a positive interview experience. 24% were negative. They have an average benefits plan.

Indeed.com gives them a 4.1/5 rating. Again, highest category is work/life balance.

Xoriant was recognized as one of the "Best Companies to work for - 2019" by Silicon India. [May 2019 issue https://special.siliconindia.com/vendor/best-companies-to-wo... ]

The salaries they pay are in the average to slightly above average range.

Xoriant was actually founded in 1990, just after the 1987 HFT crash. They provide professional, secure, and cutting edge management and analysis of data for small to medium sized business worldwide. Their CEO Girish Gaitonde prides himself on his responsive agility, growing intelligence, efficient decision-making, and valuable experience.

They recently acquired CloudIO, expanded a new Global Delivery Center, and seems to be winning many awards. They are larger than their next 3 competitors [who all claim to be "one of Xoriant's rivals" ... using Xoriant by name and giving them free press as the leader in their sector] [There are actually 2 competitors who have a higher market cap, ASG and Blackberry, listed 9th and 10th. Nobody discusses them ... not my industry ... I have no idea why .. I don't think those two have a focused strategy to compete.]

#############################################

This is more likely a strange fake job opening [I didn't see this position offered], a really bad recruiter, or a crazy person who had a bad experience with a senior data scientist and thinks that this ridiculous rant will attract professional talent who c...

Even if it's not, are you going to do anything about it? If not, then what does it matter?