Given Microsoft's discriminating hiring and rewards processes (they are publicly proud of paying their diverse staff more for the same work), I am curious if the layoffs impacted "non diverse" talent disproportionally. In hiring, recruiters prioritize D&I candidates to show HMs (and HMs can't see who allied), HM had to profile on race and s-x with at least one women and one URM/BIPOC (and encouraged only to put three ). Schedulers prioritize D&I candidates. Interviewers have to interview in D&I ideology. If you want to offer a non diverse person you have to put them on hold until finding diverse talent or get a "diversity exception" from your CVP. Given this and Microsoft's bias against non diverse talent, it would not surprise me if layoffs had that same bias and discrimination. They probably used their "Self ID" survey (asking employees for race, s-x s-xual identity, and other identifying factors).
9 replies (most recent on top)
OP here, wow I didn't make that connection. I wish it were all lies, truth is stranger than fiction. I don't think asking a CVP what should be a simple yes/no question will work. You'll never get an admission and instead will be either ignored, deflected, or given a corporate non-answer, which should give you your answer right there. I think my curiosity is valid given the mass firings for performance and layoffs. It would provide peace of mind to many if there was data to show that they didn't use the same hiring logic to require termination of "overrepresented" employees based on race/color/s-x/DEI. Microsoft probably won't ever give up this data as proudly as their reports on hiring unless compelled to do so.
CVP of Talent: Lindsay-Rae McIntyre
CVP of Learning: Lindsay-Rae McIntyre
Chief Diversity Officer: Lindsay-Rae McIntyre
and what comes first? here is the full title:
Lindsay-Rae McIntyre, Chief Diversity Officer, Corporate Vice President of Talent and Learning, Microsoft
Literally talent acquisition, development, and learning is run out of the offices of DEI. You can't make this sh-t up.
No conflict of interests here in building a performance based meritocracy... move along.
Microsoft also requires all employees to write up how they have contributed to and will contribute to D&I. (D&I is Microsoft's brand for DEI and includes all components of DEI ideology including equity).
Managers are then required to provide feedback and guidance on their employee's D&I performance and plans.
D&I is the first required "Core Priority" (and remained so for years) in annual performance reviews. Then Microsoft started failing in security to the point that there were several government agency hacks and foreign actors attained access to government systems in Azure. (coincidence?) So Microsoft added "Security" as the second required core priority as a reaction. This is how it still today. Any employee (including managers) are familiar with these requirements and go to msconnects to see.
Google says "Microsoft connects Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) with performance reviews by integrating D&I considerations into the performance evaluation process. This includes setting D&I goals ... Microsoft incorporates D&I goals into performance plans, encouraging managers and employees to actively contribute ... Performance reviews assess not only what employees achieve but also how they achieve it, specifically evaluating their inclusive behaviors, such as collaboration, communication, and alignment with core values ... Ensuring Equitable Outcomes: Microsoft strives for pay equity and equitable performance outcomes"
Microsoft's own diversity report publicly says: "Annual performance and development goal related to Diversity & Inclusion (D&ICore Priority) introduced for all employees" [2018-2022] and "Every employee sets an annual D&I Core Priority goal, informed by the One Microsoft D&I Plan, to enable individual accountability" [2024].
https://fortune.com/2023/11/08/microsoft-diversity-performance-reviews-inclusion-managers/
All employees are required to take D&I training and given that D&I is part of everyone's performance evaluations it has become embedded in ALL projects including Microsoft's required annual security and compliance training.
Even employees working directly and indirectly under federal contract are required to take D&I training and write a D&I core priority in their annual performance reviews.
@f1 What exactly are lies, can you be more specific? Microsoft has had discriminatory hiring practices (https://www.hrdive.com/news/microsoft-to-pay-3m-to-job-applicants-to-resolve-hiring-bias-claims/585681/). Microsoft also made bold diversity claims and responded to the United States Department of Labor Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs here (https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2020/10/06/ofccp-diversity-employment-laws/) where they claim (direct quote, read the blog) "Continue to require diverse slates of candidates for roles at the company to ensure we see a broad range of talented candidates". As OP explained, this was by requiring at least one woman and at least one URM/BIPOC to interview or else get a CVP exception if wanting to make an offer to a "non-diverse" individual. HM are not told the race/s-x of candidates, so they are in practice being asked to consciously profile. Maybe @f1 has a better explanation for how this requirement was enforced (If so, they should suggest the idea to HR and GTA). Microsoft itself lists D&I in it's interview tips (https://careers.microsoft.com/v2/global/en/hiring-tips/interview-tips.html) and the previous link also says "Continue to train our employees on inclusive hiring practices
". As for the comment about paying "non-diverse" less for the same work, this was widely reported as well (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/CB34EvLdhQ0). Finally, Microsoft does have a "Self-ID" for D&I (https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/11/01/microsofts-2023-diversity-and-inclusion-report-a-decade-of-transparency-commitment-and-progress/). I'm not sure if you have taken this Self-ID, it it doesn't seem like you work at Microsoft or have worked with senior leadership or global talent acquisition. If any of those are lies, that's not my experience and would be good to know your experience. These things are largely unreported because of fear and people don't speak of for fear of their job or being labeled a bigot or "co-n." I hope you take a moment to consider your own biases and that you may be currently ignorant on this topic (definition: lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about a particular thing). If you do work at Microsoft and doubt the above I would suggest asking your CVP "have you ever had to make a hiring diversity slate exception for an offer?", maybe at your next all hands for them to tell the whole org "the truth", otherwise I don't think you are displaying a growth mindset and you are choosing to stay willfully ignorant.
This is/was true for the most senior and lead talent recruiting and acquisition in our org. Probably was meant with good intentions but ended up putting into leadership those with more extreme ideological views.
@OP I am hoping this is only my experience but: my HR rep (the HR mgr overseeing my org) once told me that I needed to lower the line, so I could get more diverse team members (as my diversity score was _low_). We are part of the SWE team, btw...
Those are the most ignorant comments I’ve seen on the site, aside from them being absolute lies. Keep blaming DEI for your issues.
They keep the diverse and fire the workers, watch what happens next… oops
They also gave wide spread diversity "special stock awards", i.e. special bonuses in the form of company ownership based on race/s-x.