This paper provides empirical evidence on the aggregation of information in hiring committees. We use data from the hiring process of a large company in which committee members first conduct independent one-on-one interviews and then deliberate to reach a collective hiring decision. Results show that the mapping of committee members' initial assessments to final decisions is not deterministic, leaving scope for deliberation and individual influence. Committee decisions are systematically less aligned with recommendations made by women than with those made by men, despite similar qualifications, experience, and evaluation behavior. This gender difference in influence is strongest when disagreement is high and when women are in the minority. Further results suggest that it has implications for the gender composition of new hires.