Google Claims to Love Diversity, So Why Did They Just Do This With Their Pay?
Google, one of the world’s leading tech giants alongside Microsoft and Apple, has made it clear over the last several years that they are huge proponents of diversity, bending over backwards to accommodate certain groups of individuals, inadvertently creating a protected class.
Well, despite all of their claims, it seems that they aren’t as sold out to the concept of diversity as they attempt to make everyone else believe they are, because, as they say, the proof is in the pudding.
Apparently the company’s diversity goals will not be tied to pay.
On Wednesday, shareholders, including top executives, of Google’s parent company Alphabet Inc., voted down an employee-backed proposal to tie pay to its diversity goals.
The proposal was presented by employees calling for Google’s parent company to commit financially to ending the gender pay gap and promoting a more inclusive environment. But, as Reuters reports, despite strong rhetoric from employees about how “a gender pay gap and lack of diversity could make it difficult for the company to hire and retain workers, posing a long-term risk to its ability to innovate,” shareholders shot down the idea.Trending:
One of those arguing for the diversity pay proposal was software engineer Irene Knapp, who blasted the company’s response to various “diversity and inclusion activities” presented by individuals, which she said had created a “chilling effect” on those trying to promote the supposed company-wide goals.
“At Alphabet, diversity and inclusion activities by individual contributors have been met with a disorganized array of responses, including formal reprimand,” Knapp told shareholders. “The chilling effect … has impaired company culture.”Advertisement - story continues below
Another proponent of the shot-down diversity pay policy is Google’s HR director, Eileen Naughton, who said that regardless of how the shareholders vote, the company will continue to work toward its internal goal of reaching “market supply” representation — the percentages of candidates in the field — of women and minorities by 2020.
Check out a couple of paragraphs from the rejected proposal:
Explicitly tying business leaders’ compensation to sustainability performance is an established tool for promoting executive focus and accountability to corporate sustainability goals. Linking sustainability metrics to executive compensation could reduce risks related to sustainability underperformance, incentivize employees to meet goals and achieve resultant benefits, and boost accountability. Evidence is mounting that outperformance on sustainability issues is correlated to financial outperformance and lower cost of capital.
Our Company has not explicitly linked sustainability goals, including metrics regarding diversity and inclusion, with senior executive incentives. This is despite the fact that Alphabet has taken certain steps to address environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues. However, investors seek clarity on how Alphabet drives sustainability improvement and how that strategy is supported by C-Suite accountability. Intentionally and transparently integrating sustainability into executive compensation performance measures would enhance Alphabet’s approach. …
If you’re going to claim to be about diversity, then you need to live consistently within the parameters of your espoused worldview, or else risk looking ingenuous, like a big, fat hypocrite.
The bottom line is, if you want people to take you and your belief system seriously, you need to show the world how it impacts your life. If this is not evident, no one will pay much attention to your views, believing that they are weak.
Source: The Daily Wire