Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Reverses Stand on Discrimination Bill
sriram_2001 writes "Bowing to intense pressure both from outside as well as its employees, Microsoft has reversed its stand on the anti-discrimination bill. In a company wide email, Steve Ballmer says that though the Washington legislative session is over for the year, they'll support any such legislation in the future. However, he adds that they'll be supporting it in the US only as they don't want to involve the company in debates in countries with different cultures and value systems. He also says that he doesn't think Microsoft should be involved in most public policy issues." Announcement about the email's release on the Scobleizer main site.
Only those which involve guaranteeing a continual source of piles of money large enough to roll around naked in.
i wonder where they stand on evolution/creation regarding monkey-man Ballmer...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I'm bisexual, and I hate Microsoft.
But... frankly I just can't get myself to care about this particular issue. At all. We don't exactly *need* Microsoft's support. As long as they're not actually holding a stance *against* the discrimination bill, and they are using nondiscriminatory hiring practices themselves, I think that's just fine. Those that are not against us are for us (in this case more than many others). Honestly my response when Microsoft dropped their support of the bill was "well, it was awfully nice of them to support it up until the point where they stopped". Now, well, I'm not expecting Microsoft to take any action one way or the other on this bill, but it's nice of them that they will anyway.
There's plenty of companies who aren't taking a stand on this discrimination bill without anyone noticing; there's plenty of reasons to dislike Microsoft and their business practices without having to drag in minutiae of the actions of their lobbyists. Let it go.
Freedom to oppress, or freedom from oppression?
"" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
"He also says that he doesn't think Microsoft should be involved in most public policy issues"
Microsoft (or any other corporation) shouldn't be involved in ANY public policy issues, that's what elected representatives are for.
The State's legislative session is over for the year. Now that it no longer makes a difference, Microsoft switches back the high road as a P.R. move. Terrific. And all the press will praise Microsoft for their generosity, and the sheeple will love them again.
Blah.
Sorry Steve, but social responsibility is part of running a business. This is especially true for monopolies. Also interesting that they are willing to stake out the moral ground when it comes to intellectual property and freedom to innovate, but lack courage/conviction when it comes to other issues.
Someday a Slashdot ID of 177180 will mean something.
It was also OK when they changed their minds. Reassessing your position and deciding that a given battle isn't your place is commendable, and I could appreciate that.
Now, though, they just plain suck. "Really, folks, even though it's too late to get this one bill passed, we'll sure lobby for the next one that comes along! Unless we don't! But never mind that; for now we can say that you have our full support without facing any of the consequences of doing so!"
What a horridly cynical, insulting position to take. Were I gay, I think I'd be far more furious at this latest flip-flop than at their earlier decision not to support it. At worst, that move just looked cowardly. This one appears flat-out manipulative.
I am a
[Ballmer] adds that they'll be supporting it in the US only as they don't want to involve the company in debates in countries with different cultures and value systems.
What about countries whose culture and value systems don't give any consideration to "intellectual" "property"? Will MS refrain from involvement in that debate too?
My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
It's not just a "feel good campaign". It does affect the company - MS has lost employees over this, and had possible employees turn down offers and even change their minds on previously accepted offers. And that doesn't even take into account business lost because of the decision.
Attracting and retaining talent is very important - which is one of the reasons for the pro-diversity attitide inside the company. They've realized that supporting things inside isn't enough when people also have to live in areas where they may not find the same attitude toward diversity. No matter how accepting MS may be of gay employees, if that employee can't find housing because of being discriminated against, they're not going to work at MS. This helps support that goal.
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
To gays: You have our support! ...until next time, but we'll be sure to support you then, honest!
From opposition groups: Hey, you're a business, not a charity! Stick to business-related stuff!
To the world, loudly: Oops! Changed our mind. We're a business, not a charity.
To gays, quietly:
I'd be hard-pressed to imagine a more two-faced reaction to the whole episode. You can't just support something whenever it's popular; either be for it, or against it, or stay out of the discussion altogether.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I don't believe MS is evil, any more. They were once upon a time, but I think that something's fundamentally changed over there.
... is still a serial killer.
A serial killer who one day decides to donate blood
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
It's not usually the policy of a company, but now they've gone and gotten involved, so it's too late, they can't withdraw support without looking like they support the other side, because people are dumb as rocks.
-Jesse
Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
The short version is, if you discriminate against members of group X, you cut yourself off from the contributions which potentially valuable members of group X can make. It doesn't matter, particularly, what group X is -- if you discriminate against blacks, or Jews, or homosexuals, or any other large identifiable group of people, you can be damn sure that there are at least some people in that group who would otherwise be happy to work for you and would do a very, very good job. You're limiting the talent pool.
At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law, I invite you to consider how differently WW2 might have turned out if Germany hadn't forced all of its Jewish scientists into exile (those who were perceptive enough to see which way the wind was blowing and get out while they still could, I mean.) An awful lot of them ended up working for the US government on a little project in New Mexico.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
You're exactly right--sexual orientation shouldn't be an issue at all. The problem is that some in our society are bent on denying benefits to same-sex couples that "traditional" couples already enjoy, and this has the effect of discouraging talented (and, yes, technically diverse!) people from working where they're needed. That's why it's an issue.
You want bizarre? Wait 'til the fundamentalists who pressured Microsoft decide to publicly endorse OSS as retaliation.
As Jascha Heifetz said, "No matter what side of an argument you're on, you always find some people on your side that wish you were on the other side."
How does sexual-orientational diversity help a software company to produce better software?
Gee, I don't know. Do you think maybe we'd have seen some more interesting work from Alan Turing if he hadn't been driven to suicide by a homophobic government?
A healthy society cannot afford to waste its intellectual resources in this manner. Turing's case is a good example of how discrimination harms everybody, even those of us who aren't members of the targeted community or subculture.
Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
Here, I will if no one else will: I suspect evil. But then I often do when a politician / corporation / entity reverses its stated position in response to public pressure. That embodies a willingness to go with the mob, and while the mob might be right in this occassion, it is often wrong. But that willingness to go along is exactly what allows real evil to flourish, as witnessed in nazi germany. There, great, now you've invoked Godwin's law, thanks.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
I've said it elsewhere, but I'll say it again.
This does directly impact Microsoft.
Microsoft values diversity in its hiring practices for various reasons. They WANT a variety of people working here. This helps to attract great talent.
However, the people that work at Microsoft also have to live in the surrounding communities. And while employees won't have to face discrimination at work, if they have to deal with it when going about the rest of their lives, it will negatively impact their desire to work in such a place. It doesn't matter if you can work at MS if you're getting denied for housing, or your partner is unable to find a job.
So from a perspective of finding the best employees, this is related to business.
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
How about more coding, less bitching about how Microsoft feels about what should be someone's personal business. I'm no fan of bigotry, but a corporate workplace is not the place for email storms of this nature.
Why the hell not? If my company can take a stand for righteousness, then I will by all means encourage them to do so by all means available to me, and applaud all who do so. Business is about making money, but not exclusively. Business can affect social policy, both for the positive and the negative. If Microsoft can do something to make the world a more judicial place, then so much the better.
As a "Mac zealot", I unhesitatingly say "good job, Microsoft." The more people who stand up to those extreme right-wing theocrats the better.
Ok, deal. If Microsoft goes bankrupt because of supporting this bill they're off the hook.