Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer Led Illegal Purge of Male Employees, Lawsuit Charges (mercurynews.com)
A prominent local media executive fired from Yahoo last year has filed a lawsuit accusing CEO Marissa Mayer of leading a campaign to purge male employees. "Mayer encouraged and fostered the use of (an employee performance-rating system) to accommodate management's subjective biases and personal opinions, to the detriment of Yahoo's male employees," said the suit by Scott Ard filed this week in federal district court in San Jose. From a MercuryNews article: Ard, who worked for Yahoo for 3 and a half years until January 2015, is now editor-in-chief of the Silicon Valley Business Journal. His lawsuit also claims that Yahoo illegally fired large numbers of workers ousted under a performance-rating system imposed by Mayer. That allegation was not tied to gender. Yahoo spokeswoman Carolyn Clark said Yahoo couldn't comment on pending litigation, but she defended the company's performance-review process, which she said was guided by "fairness." "Our performance-review process was developed to allow employees at all levels of the company to receive meaningful, regular and actionable feedback from others," Clark said. "We believe this process allows our team to develop and do their best work. Our performance-review process also allows for high performers to engage in increasingly larger opportunities at our company, as well as for low performers to be transitioned out."
It's easy to drop feminism and feminists into the same category as treehugger and right-to-lifers because of the fanatic element. There are people who wake up every day and hate well off white men simply because they're well off white men with no effort to understand the point of how they got to be where they were. They give the movement a bad name.
It's honestly refreshing to come here and see how many of us agree about the feminist and SJW narrative being all about demonizing white men here in the US. It's absolutely out of control. All we can really do is keep pressing on. Eventually this too shall pass and we will hopefully get the US back on track. As annoying and dangerous as this is, every generation has their rebellious phase. The difference this time is social media.
The social programs of the 1960s did result in the breakup of many Black nuclear families. Whether that's the cause of their lack of success w.r.t. well-off white families is unknown, because they also didn't have that success before that happened. Something else must have also been in play.
It's just incredible how far removed from reality you are. Feminists disagree and criticise each other all the time, just read any of the academic journals, blogs, news sites or attend any talks to see it in action. So the idea that "feminism is infallible" only exists in your mind.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
We all think we know "fairness" and we all think it's a good thing. Unfortunately it's not actually well-defined and written in stone. My definition of "fairness" is not the same as yours and if Marissa's definition includes getting rid of guys to re-balance the work force to her liking along gender lines, then that's perfectly "fair", right?
Are you paying your "fair share" of taxes?
Are you doing your "fair share" of work to justify your slice of pay and benefits?
Are immigrants getting a "fair" chance at your job? Are you getting a "fair" share at theirs?
Are the Wall St bankers getting a "fair" deal when they get bailed out while paying politicians huge "speaking fees"?
Hillary Clinton got off with over a hundred documented felonies, is that "fair"? A US Navy sailor will be going to prison for a year for six photos that he had in his personal possession that were of a less-classified nature - is that "fair"?
People will disagree on ALL the above, depending on their politics, their place in the economy, etc. "fairness" is simply not a well-defined thing whose definition we all agree on. There's no objective standard for it, which is why politicians LOVE to use the term; they can say it meaning one thing and know that each member of their audience is hearing something entirely different and something each one of them will fell good about.
"Fair" and "Fairness" should be political "trigger words" that cause people to immediately become suspicious and skeptical and to ask lots more questions - no matter WHO uses the words and no matter their claimed agenda