Correct me if I'm wrong, but hiring and firing based upon racial, sexual, and other protected characteristics is illegal, so why doesn't anyone in tech challenge this? It seems to me there are plenty of emails that could be used as evidence in a case like this. Why aren't any lawyers chomping at the bit to take up a case in this area? With the ideas of "unconscious bias" et. al., it would seem to me the big tech companies are blatantly telling employees that their employment will be affected by factors beyond their control and that are related to these protected characteristics. Can anyone with some legal knowledge enlighten me?
Yeah, I realize I would need to make an individual case for it. I'm just wondering why there hasn't been someone who has pursued an individual case yet. I mean, one of Satya's emails literally says the following: "We will take new steps to hold everyone accountable for diversity and inclusion. This past year, we increased our commitment with a new core priority on inclusion for every employee. If you are not helping to create an inclusive culture, your rewards, your career trajectory and possibly even your employment will be impacted."
This email from Satya is kind of scary. Are these actual words? If it's true why the media, so called tech-writers keeping quiet
Never understood how programs like FBU and Google EP which state on their website they discriminate based on skin color can exist
Agreed. See my reply to the other reader's comment for a verbatim example of some bias.
What do you mean? If I'm thinking of what I think you mean, isn't it protected by Affirmative Action?
Well, it should be, and that's my point. These policies to hire, fire, and delay career advancement based on protected characteristics should be forbidden by such laws as Affirmative Action.
Could you give an example? Who is hiring or firing on the basis of a protected characteristic?
Please read my reply to fomo!'s comment, where I quote one of Satya's emails, verbatim.
There's a case in front of the supreme court right now about employers firing people in the LBGQT community for only their membership in that community and if its discrimination. Women do not have protection at a Federal level which is why so many people are clamoring for the final state needed to help ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. There are some laws that protect against discrimination but there are some laws that actively discriminate against people. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/08/us/politics/supreme-court-gay-transgender.html
Discrimination according to me is when there are legit reasons for hiring someone for a potential role but curbing all their enthusiasm to learn because of their race/gender/identity
See recent case against Harvard. Suing for racial discrimination is a luxury only for certain races.
A case like what? Read about “at will employment”
lol, how about you read about "discrimination". At-will employment has nothing to do with what OP is talking about. Next time read the post instead of rushing to get your first comment in so you can get Top Contributor.
It’s funny how you assume what OP is talking about has anything to do with discrimination