Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Your attempt to erect a straw man with a "maybe" argument that was never made. I know we can expect the full deflection to follow with claims that someone believes something and they must now defend against a false accusation lest they reveal themselves (or whatever attempt is made to ignore this meritless case).
A number of labor boards have been punchlines for *decades* now because of how one-sided their decisions have been on key cases.
I think it was about 10 or 15 years ago that Boeing wanted to build a factory in South Carolina. Their main facilities in Washington State couldn't handle anticipated demand, so they had to expand somewhere. Why South Carolina? Not only was it convenient to the East Coast, where a number of key customers were, South Carolina is home to a healthy manufacturing center, including several automotive plants; not only was the infrastructure there to allow for another factory, they could hypothetically poach line workers from the car companies.
Someone, however, told the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) that Boeing was going to move *all* manufacturing to South Carolina, and that this was being done because South Carolina wasn't a union state. Cue the NLRB getting up in Boeing's face and blocking the move without bothering to actually look at the facts of the matter. Jobs were to be created in a non-union state, and the NLRB just couldn't have that.
So what the recent news regarding the law suit.
James Damore just filed a class action lawsuit against Google, saying…
James Damore just filed a class action lawsuit against Google, saying it discriminates against white male conservatives
I can't quote from the stuff that's come out so far in regards to the lawsuit filing, 'cause of TOS. But it is... eye opening.
Get your popcorn ready!
View attachment 217862
I don't think it will go far. He posted in an internal memo that women are less represented in tech jobs because they are biologically less capable probably violates one of the company statements he had to follow when he was hired.
The Labor Board disagreed.
Except that's not what the memo said, at all.
Instead of making another thread, I figured I'd just add it here: Another month, another discrimination lawsuit against Google/Youtube.
Wilberg v. Google - Recruiter that was fired for refusing to discriminate | Recruitment | Employment
It's almost like there's a pattern of behavior here... odd, isn't it?
Indeed! The suits keep piling up!
Google accused of 'extreme' gender pay discrimination by US labor department
Instead of making another thread, I figured I'd just add it here: Another month, another discrimination lawsuit against Google/Youtube.
Wilberg v. Google - Recruiter that was fired for refusing to discriminate | Recruitment | Employment
It's almost like there's a pattern of behavior here... odd, isn't it?
Exactly!It's almost as if everyone would be better off if they could just hire whomever is best for the job and not worry about race and gender.
Exactly!
... and society as a whole would be better off if hiring decisions were made in such fashion.
It's almost as if everyone would be better off if they could just hire whomever is best for the job and not worry about race and gender.
If you want to see if this is likely to happen, look at recent developments in the military. That is a place, if anywhere, where we would say that we should get the people most qualified for the job without worrying about gender. And indeed most people will say that standards should not be lowered to allow women into the military. Even people who support female soldiers will generally do so only on the condition that they meet the same grueling standards as men.
But what happens in practice? When the standards are uniformly applied, very few women at all are able to meet them. If people were honest in being able to ignore gender in the decision, that would be the end of it. We allow women only if they meet the grueling standards most didn't, so there aren't many female soldiers.
Instead while the standards were previously held up as fair and essential, they are now criticized as unfair precisely because few women meet them. It is said that if men can do something better than women, on average, and the standards require those skills, then the standards aren't really anything important and are only there to weed out women. Nevermind that these were the very same standards previously thought to be essential, now they must be eliminated in the interest of having more female soldiers. The talk of women meeting the same grueling standards was nothing more than a polite fiction that nobody really took seriously in the first place.
You can see how thick the double talk is by looking at reports on current changes to standards. (A nice drinking game for that article is to take a shot every time the article directly contradicts itself, such as by saying that the changes aren't about accommodating women and then saying that they were made as part of an effort to adopt gender-neutral standards. Or don't, if you are worried about your liver.)
And that's just showing what happens when there is a difference in ability, which is relatively easy to test (until the tests are dismissed as bigoted for getting the wrong results). The primary problem in the tech field and many other places is a difference in interest. That is, it simply doesn't matter if women and minorities are capable of doing just as good job in the tech industry if not enough of them are interested in the field to study the necessary skills. Either way you end with a limited pool of applicants from those to draw from, and of course any search that merely looks for the most qualified candidate will come up with fewer from those groups. But while people claim to understand that and support getting the most qualified candidates, in reality that's just a polite fiction. What they really believe at the end of the day is that numbers should be equal across all groups, because it must be true that there are equal numbers of qualified candidates from all possible groups.
No worries.The primary problem in the tech field and many other places is a difference in interest. That is, it simply doesn't matter if women and minorities are capable of doing just as good job in the tech industry if not enough of them are interested in the field to study the necessary skills.
The irony is that it's so obviously better for any organization to recruit and hire whomever is best for the job...with absolutely zero consideration for race or gender.
Imagine if NASA didn't send the most qualified people into space...but instead sent less qualified people because they didn't want to appear racist or sexist. Imagine if the military promoted some black woman to a 4 star general position even though she was desperately unqualified...because society thinks she had to work harder for her position as a captain than a white guy who made general.
Now imagine if an entire nation did this for all jobs, all positions, in every strata of society. That nation would fall apart much faster than it could repair itself.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?