Slashdot Mirror
Former Yahoo Employee Challenges the Legality of Yahoo's Ranking System (nytimes.com)
whoever57 writes: A former employee of Yahoo is challenging Yahoo's performance review and termination process. The ranking system was introduced to Yahoo by Ms. Mayer on the recommendation of management consultants McKinsey & Co.. Gregory Anderson, an editor who oversaw Yahoo's autos, homes, shopping, small business and travel sites in Sunnyvale, Calif. is claiming that the ranking and termination process was flawed to the extent that the terminations were not based on performance and hence constitute mass layoffs, which require notice periods under both California and Federal law. He is also alleging gender discrimination, under which women were given preferential treatment over men in the hiring, promotions and layoff processes.
It's great to be a CEO: get paid millions, then use the company's money to bring in consultants to do your own work!
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
When I worked for a state university system I had occasion to read the DOE regulations about discrimination. Colleges are required to file various paperwork about racial and gender statistic of students who apply, students admitted, and students who graduate, to prove that they aren't discriminating. I was a bit surprised to find out that the DOE regulations explicitly state that discrimination against males and caucasians is not discrimination. I wonder of the Department of Labor has a similar rule.
Yeah, except that that's incorrect: http://www.lawfficespace.com/2013/12/yes-white-males-are-protected-class.html.
As to the women given preference, considering they're paid less, on average, than men
The problem is that they're not. Women get paid on average the same as men, once you factor in experience, hours worked and contribution.
Women under 30 get paid more than men.
Women in part times roles get paid more per hour than men in part time roles.
Women spend most of the household income, even where it's earned by men.
Please, do some fucking research before spouting spurious divisive bullshit about gender pay differentials.
Here's what I say to my kids when they get caught up in some kind of Internet jihad: there are 30000 tons of brussels sprouts produced in the USA every year (7500 acres planted x 8000 pounds/acre typical yield). So clearly some people like brussels sprouts, peculiar as that is. If you take a large enough group of people you can find exemplars for any behavior, preference and outcome you need to "prove" any point (e.g., "brussels sprouts are yummy"). Everything that Gamergaters say about feminists is true -- of somebody, somewhere. It proves nothing about what a typical feminist is like.
To get at the truth you need to do two things: (1) find aggregate data which tells you whether your generalization has even a chance of being true; the disaggregate that data to find the kernel of truth that makes your over-generalization feel convincing. It's bound to be true of some people, and that's where you need to focus your attention.
So lets take the notion that white males are discriminated against educationally. The aggregate data clearly shows this is not generally true. For males age 25-29, 55% of Asians have a college degree, 37% of whites, 17% of blacks, and 13% of hispanics. In total 31% of males have college degrees and 37% of females. This paints a picture where white males don't get quite as much education as females, but are still in a very strong position compared to their black and hispanic counterparts. Some of the male/female educational disparity may be due to high-paying trade jobs generally being more open to men; if you look at income, the median male income is $860/week vs. $706/week for women.
So the overall picture is mixed, but for the most part the picture looks relatively rosy from white men in general. But no individual white man is in exactly the position of men in general. It's clear that a lot of white men are in a bad situation now, which they may attribute to benefits going to their hispanic or black neighbors, but in fact those group are in a similar or worse place if you compare hispanics and blacks of similar educational attainment.
Uniquely in the developed world mortality for American men aged 45-54 has increased; men who should be near the apex of their earning capacity and benefiting from a reduction in smoking and advances in medical treatment of degenerative diseases that start to kick it that age. But if you disaggregate that data you see that it's driven by a massive increase in mortality for men with only a high school education.
What this tells me is that we have an economic class problem in this country. Some white men look around and think the weight of all those hispanics and blacks are making the boat sink, but the real problem is that the boat has a hole in it.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.