fester@math.berkeley.edu (07/23/88)
In article <12107@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> cook@Alliant.COM (Dale C. Cook) writes: > I think high tech is one of the least >descriminatory industries simply because it is relatively easy to >measure and reward competitance. Any similar/different experience >out there? With all due respect, I think this misses the point. Discrimination has never happenned because of inability to measure (and certainly not reward !) competence - discrimination has exactly been the refusal to acknowledge and/or failure to reward clear competence. It has never mattered how clear a gauge was available - if you think about it, math and science are some of the least subjective (in a certain sense) fields existing, and have consistently been the arena for some of the most unbelievable sexism. But I do have my own story to share with regards to this, some parts of which I told almost a year ago (in soc.women) so much will be told briefly. When I went to work at my first job, I was one of four recent college graduates working in the AI branch. The other three were men, each of whom held a degree either in Computer Science or in Mathematics. I had a double degree, one in CS and one in Math. I was put to work writing (expletive deleted) technical documents that were required for government contracts. For over six months. On stuff I had never coded. Whose code I had never even *seen*. The other three did nothing but technical work, from the minute they arrived. (This much I had already told.) But the part that is relevant to what you say about measuring competence is the following: when I interviewed at company XX, the branch manager told me that they did not hire people with less than a Master's directly but that what they did with someone in my position is to have them go be hired by XX Consulting Services (a consulting company under the same parent company) and then they picked up the contract on a consultant basis. The branch manager told me if I did that, the AI branch would pick up my contract for three months and **give me a chance to prove myself** during that time, after which they would sign me up again. Square one : Needless to say, during those three months all they had me do was this asinine writing. I grew concerned and asked for an appointment with the manager. I told him that he had said I had three months in which to prove myself, and that renewal of my contract was contingent on this, yet they hadn't given me anything with which to prove myself ! He told me that they would pick up my contract for another three months, and during *those* three months I would have a chance to prove myself. GOTO Square One. The point is clear. This is a particularly blatant case, but there are much more subtle occurences where women are simply NOT PUT IN A POSITION TO DEMONSTRATE COMPETENCE. Thus with all the good will in the world, it doesn't matter if competence is STRICTLY rewarded. If women are being kept out of opportunities to demonstrate competence, the rest is meaningless. And I have some advice I'd like to pass on to whatever women are reading this (it might be good for men too, actually) : think VERY hard about relocating for a job. In particular, don't move out to an area where the company you are working for is the only computer company in the area. When I moved from Boston to Schenectady, NY, bought a car and got a lease on an apartment (i.e. incurred serious debts,) I didn't have an option when the company I was working for started jerking me around. I had to earn money and they were the only computer company in the area. So preferably, if you take a job, have it be someplace like Silicon Valley or Rte. 128 or some huge technology cluster so that you have the option to leave should it prove neccessary. It's a drag to have to think defensively all the time, but its worth the grief it saves you. Lea Fester fester@math.berkeley.edu ucbvax!math!fester "They learned that when you try real hard, nothing changes" - Stand and Deliver
pete@uunet.UU.NET (Pete Turner) (07/25/88)
In article <12503@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> fester@math.berkeley.edu writes: >And I have some advice I'd like to pass on to whatever women are >reading this (it might be good for men too, actually) : think VERY >hard about relocating for a job. In particular, don't move out to >an area where the company you are working for is the only computer >company in the area... So preferably, if you take a >job, have it be someplace like Silicon Valley or Rte. 128 or some >huge technology cluster so that you have the option to leave should >it prove neccessary. >It's a drag to have to think defensively all the time, but its worth >the grief it saves you. Based on my observations of the work experiences of women co-workers over the last few years at a couple of different jobs, I would have to agree. I have seen first hand how very competent software engineers, who happen to be female, are frequently stuck with completely inappropraite work (which happens to look a lot like secretarial work). Pete