I've noticed a disparity in advancement opportunities for white males at Salesforce compared to females. It seems that less experienced female engineers are being promoted ahead of more qualified male counterparts. This raises concerns about fairness within our leadership group. Personally, I've observed several instances where less experienced engineers have been promoted prematurely, while their more experienced male counterparts have had to work much harder for recognition. I'm curious if this trend is company-wide. While I appreciate Salesforce as a company, I'm starting to wonder if I should explore opportunities for advancement elsewhere. Anyone else experiencing the same thing?
10 replies (most recent on top)
I think the responses to this question have become a bit too extreme. If you want to argue that advancement opportunities are not based on what you do (skill) but on who you know, then I can understand that point of view. With an influx of consultancy types (talkers rather than doers) over the years, this probably has become even worse. It’s a company culture to promote talkers over doers, nothing more. It’s part of the culture in the company, which looks more like a 'sales and marketing' company than a software company (where engineers, skill and (development) innovation would be at the center of company culture).
Sounds like someone is a bit salty about not being as good as they think they are.
This woke sh-t is stupid. No one cares about pride month or gender equality.
We just need the most qualified per
Son to do the job, females shouldn’t get free passes
The same thing happened in our group. The newly hired females got prematurely promoted to a senior engineer's, without the ability to do senior engineering things. Everyone else has to pickup the slack, and if you are male you get to do the the million page painful promotion packets.
The group I worked in hired a contractor. She was made permanent and quickly advanced from Engineer to Senior and then to Lead engineer. She advanced faster than anyone on the team while not being any more than average performer. I heard that when the last promotion endorsements came back in, there were a few that did not support her promotion, yet she was still promoted.
CSuite needs to be careful if they don’t want to become the subject of a Title VII suite based on -
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf
gorsuch opened the door on p.4 & p. 16 of his concurrence to Title VII challenges
… Congress chose a simple and profound rule. One holding that a recipient of federal funds may never dis- criminate based on race, color, or national origin—period.
If this exposition of Title VI sounds familiar, it should. Just next door, in Title VII, Congress made it “unlawful . . . for an employer . . . to discriminate against any individ- ual . . . because of such individual’s race, color, religion, s-x, or national origin.” §2000e–2(a)(1). Appreciating the breadth of this provision, just three years ago this Court read its essentially identical terms the same way. See Bos- tock, 590 U. S., at ___–___ (slip op., at 4–9). This Court has long recognized, too, that when Congress uses the same terms in the same statute, we should presume they “have the same meaning.” IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez, 546 U. S. 21, 34 (2005). And that presumption surely makes sense here, for as Justice Stevens recognized years ago, “[b]oth Title VI and Title VII” codify a categorical rule of “individual equal- ity, without regard to race.”…
…. the dissent does not dispute that everything said here about the meaning of Title VI tracks this Court’s precedent in Bostock interpreting mate- rially identical language in Title VII.
This woke agenda is sickening. Unfortunately leadership needs to be politically correct so this likely will worsen.
Yes your female counterparts get away with stuff that you have zero chance of getting away from
Every Technology company is publishing ever increasing DEI targets. So far any promotion, a DEI candidate will be preferred and will have much greater chances. Being white male in Technology is not easy.... Even worse if you are middle age or having white hair.... I have heard CEOs making comments that there was too many white hair people in the audience...
Wow, It seems there's an industry-wide challenge where promotions are taken from those who earn it because of their gender. What outcomes are we seeing from this trend, and how are engineers responding? Are we seeing more small business startup's, people quitting, or hoping from company-to-company?
Salesforce, might be doing this to meet their 40% women workforce agenda by 2026. https://www.salesforce.com/news/stories/salesforce-women-non-binary-hiring-2022/
It is the same for most companies actually. At VMware we are told to keep the F/M ratio at all levels same as company wide so we had to prematurely promote an F two times in 6 months to keep the ratio