All products featured on WIRED are independently selected by our editors. However, we may receive compensation from retailers and/or from purchases of products through these links.
The world's first programmer was a woman. In 1843, Ada Lovelace developed the first theoretical software algorithm, a century before the development of the modern computer. Her vision of an "analytical engine" that could "[weave] algebraic patterns just as the Jacquard loom weaves flowers and leaves", imagined a device that could create more than mathematical calculations; one that could give life to art and music.
Lovelace's vision should embody the lifeblood of Silicon Valley; that of invention, and pushing the boundaries of possibility. But her legacy jars with the image of the modern programmer – one that is distinctly and, arguably, dangerously gendered.
There's a concerning rise in the number of women accusing tech companies of having apathetic stances on inequality and harassment. Within the past few months, Google has been accused of having "systematic compensation disparities" between men and women in the company; Susan Fowler Rigetti published a 2,800-word blog post containing allegations against Uber, leading to two investigations, 20 dismissals and the resignation of Uber executive Amit Singhal over previous sexual harassment allegations.
More recently, the Uber investigation has focused on company board members to address claims of toxic company culture. Uber executive Eric Alexander was fired on 7 June for mishandling the medical report of a woman who was raped by an Uber employee in India in 2014. Uber chief executive Travis Kalanick is under scrutiny, with board members currently debating a leave of absence of three months. Kalanick, who wrote the infamous "Miami letter", in which he detailed the situations where it was appropriate for Uber employees to have sex with one another, has been with Uber since 2009.
Elsewhere in Silicon Valley, UploadVR, a San Francisco-based virtual reality startup, is being sued for claims of sexual discrimination and sex and gender harassment, "creating an unbearable environment" for female employees; and AJ Vandermeyden, a female engineer at Tesla filed a lawsuit in February claiming that Elon Musk's firm has a culture of "pervasive harassment". In May, Tesla fired her, in what Vandermeyden's lawyer claims is an act of retaliation.
In an interview with the Guardian in February, Vandermeyden claimed Tesla has a systematically prejudiced treatment of female employees and disregard for the safety of their workers.
In particular, Vandermeyden’s account describes Tesla as a hostile environment for female employees – in 2013, when she joined the company as a manufacturing engineer, she claims to have been paid less than male engineers whose work she directly took over. In meetings, she would be the only woman "among 40 to 50 men" – a theme she says is replicated at every level of management within the company. All chief executive positions at Tesla are held by men, and out of 30 vice-presidents, two are women. Across Silicon Valley, the average tech company's board of directors is 11 per cent female.
Vandermeyden explained that these examples of systematic inequality are “shocking... in this day and age” and disrupt the efficiency of the workplace.
Tesla referenced Vandermeyden's claims when announcing its decision to terminate her employment, stating: “Despite repeatedly receiving special treatment at the expense of others, Ms Vandermeyden nonetheless chose to pursue a miscarriage of justice by suing Tesla and falsely attacking our company in the press. After we carefully considered the facts on multiple occasions and were absolutely convinced that Ms Vandermeyden’s claims were illegitimate, we had no choice but to end her employment at Tesla."
Therese Lawless, Vandermeyden's lawyer, represented the former Reddit CEO Ellen Pao in her high-profile discrimination lawsuit, and told the Guardian that Tesla's decision "is an act of "clear retaliation."
More recently, studies claimed to have exposed a gender bias at Facebook which suggests code submitted by female engineers is accepted less than code written by their male counterparts, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal based on analysis from a former employee. In particular, this showed that code written by female engineers was less likely to make it through Facebook’s internal peer review system, suggesting it's more heavily scrutinised.
In response, Facebook commissioned a follow-up study by Jay Parikh, its head of infrastructure. Parikh’s findings suggested the code rejections were due to engineering rank, not gender. This suggests that females, instead, aren't being promoted or the workplace lacks female leadership. This is bolstered by figures that show only a third of Facebook's workplace is female and women hold just 17 per cent of technical roles, and 27 per cent of leadership positions.
A Facebook spokesperson said The Wall Street Journal is relying on analysis that is incomplete and inaccurate — performed by a former Facebook engineer with an incomplete data set. "Any meaningful discrepancy based on the complete data is clearly attributable not to gender but to seniority of the employee," they continued. "In fact, the discrepancy simply reaffirms a challenge we have previously highlighted — the current representation of senior female engineers both at Facebook and across the industry is nowhere near where it needs to be."
This was followed by a lawsuit, filed in Southern Florida District Court by former Magic Leap marketing head Tannen Campbell, which alleges the secretive company had a hostile work environment for women, and that leaders actively obstructed attempts to solve the problem. In particular, the complaint alleges that executives, including CEO Rony Abovitz, were fully aware that discrimination was rife. Magic Leap said it does not comment on active legal issues.
Further reports of gender bias have emerged from across the tech industry. UploadVR, a San Francisco-based virtual reality startup, has been accused by a former employee of wrongful termination, as well as “rampant sexual behaviour and focus" in the workplace.
In her lawsuit, the plaintiff, Elizabeth Scott, claims that UploadVR had "purposefully and expressly created a 'boy's club' environment", with commonplace behaviour including "degrading" behaviour towards female employees and even a "room to encourage sexual intercourse at the workplace".
UploadVR co-founders Will Mason and Taylor Freeman have denied the claims, releasing a statement that they "cannot comment directly on any pending litigation" but that they are "committed to creating a positive community".
Silicon Valley's status as a paragon of forward-thinking is at odds with these reports of sexual discrimination. The tech sector is one of the fastest growing industries and poses incredible possibilities in terms of socio-economic development, but currently the supply of STEM students fails to meet global demand. Europe could face a shortage of up to 900,000 skilled ICT workers by 2020 according to the European Commission, and this trend is similar in the United States. However, when it comes to encouraging children into tech, gender disparity in the field is a major repellant.
In a recent study conducted by Microsoft, 70 per cent of girls aged between 11 and 30 in the UK said they would feel more confident pursuing STEM careers if they knew men and women were equally employed in these professions. This is a stark contrast to the fact that, across Europe, between 46 to 68 per cent of girls rejected the idea that they will never be as good at STEM subjects as boys - suggesting that this desire to learn and excel in STEM fields is hampered not by a lack of confidence, but by industry attitudes.
In the United States, a study by the National Assessment of Educational Progress determined that when it comes to proficiency in STEM subjects, boys and girls are relatively equally matched - with 45 per cent of girls meeting or exceeding proficiency, compared to 43 per cent of boys. The disparity therefore lies not in capability, but in opportunity.
Karen Peterson, the chief executive of the National Girls Collaborative Project noted that enforcing an idea of competition between men and women in STEM fields can only harm the industry. Education is not a "zero-sum competition" - in reality the same projects that foster female interest in STEM also aid in the education of young men in relation to the field. But the attitudes towards gender within the industry are not conducive to encouraging a democratised field.
Vandermeyden's lawsuit describes a range of inappropriate behaviour directed against her, including “unwelcome and pervasive harassment by men on the factory floor...[ranging from] inappropriate language, whistling...cat calls” and other discriminatory acts. One incident allegedly involved a group of twenty men taunting Vandermeyden and another female colleague, standing on a platform above and “hooting and hollering and whistling.”
The most disturbing aspect of this kind of behaviour, Vandermeyden says, is the culture of apathy Tesla employs with such harassment. Lawless said that many women in similar positions choose not to speak up. “It’s very difficult for women to come forward. They’re concerned that their career is going to be hindered or jeopardised.”
It is concerning that such reports should emerge from Silicon Valley so soon after the accusations aimed at Uber, though. In Susan J. Fowler's blog, the former Uber employee recounts that after repeated and widespread complaints from employees about harassment or inequality, she was told by her manager she could be fired for reporting superiors to HR - despite this being classed as an illegal dismissal.
A separate investigation by the New York Times found Uber employees were at times subject to such abuses as "homophobic slurs", "[groping]" or even on occasion threatened to be physically beaten with baseball bats. Until such claims were brought to light, this culture was "only whispered about in Silicon Valley."
Since the Uber investigations began, a total of 215 complaints about harassment have been lodged with law firm Perkins Coie. The firm has recommended no action in 100 cases, whilst 57 remain under review. Other employees have received 'final warnings' or are in training.
Meanwhile, a survey by Elephant in the Valley found that 87 per cent of women in Silicon Valley felt subject to "demeaning comments from male colleagues" and 60 per cent of women in tech report unwanted sexual advances. The study discovered that 1 in 3 women felt afraid for their personal safety due to repeated sexual harassment.
It should be noted though, that the reports of an unsafe working environment at Tesla haven't just been confined to women. Other workers have previously claimed poor treatment, ranging from longer working hours for lower wages, in potentially dangerous conditions. Tesla workers recently reached out to the Union of United Automobile Workers, after having developed a host of work-related injuries. In some cases, employees are “hurting but...are too afraid to report it for fear of being labeled...a bad worker.”
The technological revolution is founded on human determination but mounting evidence suggests gender disparity and prejudices within the tech industry are directly hindering innovative development. A study conducted by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently found that the tech sector employs fewer women and fewer minorities than other private sector industries - particularly in management roles.
These disproportionate figures extend beyond the walls of Silicon Valley tech companies. In honour of Equal Pay Day 2017, a survey by Hired found that this inequality extends throughout different sectors. For example, only 20 per cent of Congress is female and across the board, only 5 per cent of Fortune 500 companies have a female CEO. On average, women receive 63 per cent lower salary offers than men for the same job at the same company.
This trend isn't new. But its continued prevalence in tech fields is troubling, considering the need for more females in STEM related roles. As the Hired report writes: "The extent of this problem is underscored when you consider this is happening to women whose skills are in extremely short supply and who work in an industry lauded as forward-thinking on social issues."
On April 4 2017, Google published a tweet in honour of Equal Pay Day, stating: "We're proud to share that we've closed the gender gap globally" according to their own annual compensation analysis. However, the Department of Labour contests Google's claims, arguing that through its own analysis of Google's finances, there are "systematic compensation disparities" between men and women in the company.
The DoL claims Google was reluctant to share its data, resulting in a lawsuit in San Francisco for Google's records. As a federal contractor, Google is legally obligated to turn over these records to the Department of Labour, so as to ensure equal opportunity programmes do not discriminate in employment because of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin or disability.
Janet Herold, regional solicitor for the DoL involved in the case, told the Guardian: "The government’s analysis at this point indicates that discrimination against women in Google is quite extreme, even in this industry." Similarly, Janette Wipper testified in court on Friday that this discrimination occurred "pretty much across the entire workforce."
In response, Google published a blog detailing the way it ensures that employees' gender is not factored into their salary. Google vice president of people operations, Eileen Naughton, writes that the accusation "came without any supporting data or methodology" and points out that the case it was raised in is currently "seeking thousands of employee records, including contact details of our employees", which Google has yet to give the DoL, saying its request is too broad.
She continues that salary suggestions are 'blind', in that the analysts who calculate them have no access to staff gender data. Their assessments are instead based on "role, job level, job location as well as current and recent performance ratings" and are analysed using a pay equity model designed pick up on systematic favouritism of one gender over another. "Our analysis gives us confidence that there is no gender pay gap at Google", she adds, although it's worth noting there's no indication of any blind process involved in giving staff their initial performance ratings.
Google's DoL case has also raised another question. In the face of claims of inequality or harassment, how should a company react? In terms of investigation into the issue, Google claimed that a collection of internal compensation data would cost $100,000, and argued that the process would be too expensive to carry out. In 2016, Google made an operating profit of $9.57 billion.
These conflating views from within and outside the industry further cloud the issue of equality in tech. The smokescreen created by varying claims detracts from the central issue - that any kind of disparity in a workforce directly damages those who are working to maintain good economy. Legislation such as the Equality Act of 2010 is supposed to safeguard against these prejudicial standards, however, vigilance within industries and regulatory bodies is still needed to ensure equality is strived for.
The question now is if Silicon Valley can step up to address discriminatory activities, and whether substantial reform can address disparities that seem ingrained in the core of the industry.
Update: 12.06.2017: Hired's report on the gender wage gap has been added to this piece. It has also been updated to include the accusations against Google, Facebook and UploadVR, as well as updated coverage of the Uber investigation.
This article was originally published by WIRED UK
