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.

Comments

Uh... y'know

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Uh... y'know

[smagruder]

That's easy! It's far easier to admit one is gay today than to admit one loves the criminal monopolist. In fact, it's also easier to be out as a gay person than admit one is an atheist, a liberal, or even suggest one has a much higher than normal IQ. Being gay is all the rage, dude. I hear the orientation-warming gifts are outta this world.

Day Late/Dollar Short: Pandering

[DaveM753]

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.

Now they officially suck

[Little Pink Bunny]

It was good when they originally supported the legislation. Although I disliked it for various reasons, I congratulated them for taking a seemingly well defended stance on a human interest issue.

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.

Different value systems

[Vainglorious Coward]

[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?

Re:Could someone please explain?

[Daniel Dvorkin]

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.

Re:Official Email Location

[Saige]

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.