Slashdot Mirror


Former Engineer Says Uber Is a Nightmare of Sexism; CEO Orders Urgent Investigation (susanjfowler.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report on The Verge: A former Uber engineer has published an explosive account of sexism and power struggles in the workplace, with allegations beginning from her very first official day with the company. The engineer, Susan Fowler (who left Uber in December and now works for Stripe), posted the account to her blog on Sunday, calling it a "strange, fascinating, and slightly horrifying story." It is indeed horrifying. Sexism is a well-documented problem in Silicon Valley, but the particulars of Fowler's account are astounding. She says problems began on day one, when her manager accosted her with details of his sex life: "In my first official day rotating on the team, my new manager sent me a string of messages over company chat. He was in an open relationship, he said, and his girlfriend was having an easy time finding new partners but he wasn't. He was trying to stay out of trouble at work, he said, but he couldn't help getting in trouble, because he was looking for women to have sex with. It was clear that he was trying to get me to have sex with him, and it was so clearly out of line that I immediately took screenshots of these chat messages and reported him to HR. When I reported the situation, I was told by both HR and upper management that even though this was clearly sexual harassment and he was propositioning me, it was this man's first offense, and that they wouldn't feel comfortable giving him anything other than a warning and a stern talking-to. Upper management told me that he "was a high performer" (i.e. had stellar performance reviews from his superiors) and they wouldn't feel comfortable punishing him for what was probably just an innocent mistake on his part. The things only get worse for Fowler. Read the full account of her story here. In the meanwhile, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick said the company would "conduct an urgent investigation" into the allegations, and promised to fire anyone who "behaves this way or thinks this is OK."

Journalist Paul Carr summing up the situation, says, "Uber's ability to be on the wrong side of every moral and ethical issue is bordering on magical."

46 of 917 comments (clear)

  1. I'm not surprised. by generic_screenname · · Score: 5, Informative

    As much as Slashdot likes to believe that sexism is imaginary, this behavior is pretty common in tech. Frankly, I've seen worse.

    1. Re:I'm not surprised. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As much as Slashdot likes to believe that sexism is imaginary, this behavior is pretty common in tech. Frankly, I've seen worse.

      OK, so you start with the strawman that "Slashdot," whoever that is, likes to believe that sexism is imaginary. But, then you say you've seen worse? I'm a software engineer in the auto industry, and I have never seen anything like what she describes. I'm not saying it doesn't happen. But, if you've seen worse, you have worked in some horrific work environments.

    2. Re:I'm not surprised. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Maybe you don't see it since you are not the target of it.

    3. Re:I'm not surprised. by Ly4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But just asking?
      A subordinate.
      By text.
      On the first day of the job.

      That's not 'just asking'.

    4. Re:I'm not surprised. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      A manager in a position of power asking their subordinate to have sex with them is absolutely sexual harassment.

    5. Re:I'm not surprised. by DogDude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wrong. A boss asking a subordinate to fuck them IS harassment.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    6. Re:I'm not surprised. by DutchUncle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Asking an equal rank colleague about a date, after working together for a while, maybe. Asking about sex on the first day, like trying a pick-up up at a bar, no. Asking a subordinate, abuse of authority, period.

    7. Re:I'm not surprised. by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If hitting on a coworker were illegal sexism, a good part of the slashdot audience wouldn't be here, because their parents never would have hooked up.

      It's not appropriate for someone to send messages like this to a subordinate, period, the end. It creates a hostile work environment because they have to worry about whether they'll be penalized for saying no.

      The appropriate response to someone walking in with a fistful of evidence that someone is engaging in sexual harassment is to fire the harasser, immediately. This is especially true anywhere that has had sexual harassment training. And basically all tech companies are doing that now, and this sort of thing is evidence that it is necessary; both the event, and all the jerkoffs scrambling to defend what is clearly unacceptable behavior.

      Uber has a rule against sex between drivers and riders, no matter what. I guarantee you that their employee code of conduct bans sexual harassment, and clear sexual advances like these without invitation are a clear case of sexual harassment.

      Finally, it wasn't actually his first offense, that was just a lie told by HR. Because HR is not your friend. Get that part straight right now. They work for the company and their job is to smooth the rough, pacify the angry, and meet legal requirements. It is not to help you.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:I'm not surprised. by fibonacci8 · · Score: 5, Informative

      You've limited the scope to "quid pro quo" sexual harassment. The article demonstrates "hostile environment" sexual harassment. There's no requirement that "compliance is made a condition of continued employment or advancement". https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/type...

      --
      Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
    9. Re:I'm not surprised. by t0rkm3 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Even so, in every bit of coaching that I have ever seen, there is a requirement of: request, rebuff, request again, escalate, unless the references are "to the reasonable person" offensive in the extreme.

      That also seems to follow the legal doctrine on the matter. An advance is considered normal and human (if stupid, from a manager), the repeated advance in the face of clear rejection causes the condition to rise to harassment. This goes for passive things like, a mudflap girl coffee mug, inappropriate humor, etc.

      I agree that the victim should escalate early and often for their own protection and documentation, but the HR person (if they were being honest) did the right thing. If we went around firing everyone for the first inappropriate thing they ever did the manpower churn itself would be a viable alternative power source.

      I'm not a lawyer, advisor, or necessarily reasonable. I'm just old enough to see this go around multiple times, sometimes having negotiated successful resolutions... sometime having quit MY JOB because of the treatment of peer and the company's response.

    10. Re:I'm not surprised. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1. Apparently the boss did not make sex a condition of continued employment.

      He's her boss. That's ALWAYS implied or always the risk.

      2. Her first response should have been to say,

      Actually I think her first response should have been to knock out his teeth. Failing that going straight to HR was entirely appropriate. Propositioning a subordinate like that is so far out of line that there is no way she is in any way responsible for trying to smooth things over.

      The rest of her "explosive blog" goes on to talk about bog standard industry stuff.

      The reason the industry is infested with problems like this is because of people like you. Oh sure I mean you might not actually do any of those things yourself, but you defend others that do and when the defense fails, you excuse the behaviour as "standard".

      Congratulations, you are part of the problem.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    11. Re:I'm not surprised. by Grog6 · · Score: 4, Funny

      generic_rebuttal{ .Sexism .Misogeny .SJW .gamergate .HillaryRhodamClinton .Trump .Putin .Nazis
      }
      END: GODWIN_EXIT

      --
      Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
    12. Re:I'm not surprised. by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Let me ask you a simple question. Ignoring the sexism, which doesn't apply to you, read her description of the corporate culture and tell me: does this sound like a place you'd like to work?

      It isn't just sexism, she describes a generally toxic work culture in which all kinds of problems can arise and persist. It's one where managers are focused on competing with each other, even to the point of undermining their supervisors; you might let a problem ride for a bit because you might need to use it against them later.

      Now granted, this might not be a fair description of Uber's culture. Or her perceptions might be colored by what was a string of bad luck. But we all know places that shade this way exist. The problem of a organizations that are at the same time bureaucratic and cutthroat go way back. What she describes could be the politics of an old-time royal court.

      Why? Why does this kind of culture crop up again and again in human history?

      I think because ruthless internal competition offsets some of the natural lethargy of a bureaucracy. It can serve the interests of whoever is on top, at least in the short term. If you have no talent for inspiring people you can at least set them against each other. But you'd be a fool to join such an organization at the bottom, knowing what it is, if you had any alternatives.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    13. Re:I'm not surprised. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah... No.

      A manager asking for sex from anyone under them is a very clear violation of any sane HR policy, not to mention any sane ethical human being.

      I work at Intel. We have yearly classes telling us to Not Do This Shit. They're super clear that this sort of Shit won't be tolerated, and for that I'm super glad.

      Also, you're an idiot and a terrible human being for your opinion.

      Yes. "Just Asking" is a problem and creates an environment that is hostile.

    14. Re:I'm not surprised. by rgmoore · · Score: 5, Informative

      the HR person (if they were being honest) did the right thing.

      At least according to the article, the HR person was not being honest. They said that it was the boss's first offense and they didn't want to put it on his record because it would hurt him. But the author spoke to other women who had complained about him before she did, so it wasn't his first offense. The most generous interpretation is that they were basing the claim of first offense on his blank official record, so that he could get an infinite number of "first" offenses left off.

      It goes to show why that approach is a bad one. If you don't want people to get in trouble for a first offense, make that the policy. Put the offense in their record, but give them a free pass for it when it comes time to evaluate them. But leaving something out of the record makes it possible for somebody to get an indefinite number of "first offenses". Of course it seems far more likely that there was an informal policy of protecting offenders who were otherwise high performing, and the whole thing about it being a first offense was a ruse.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    15. Re:I'm not surprised. by TimothyHollins · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Speaking as a student of the real sciences, when we cannot observe something we cannot make claims about it being there.

      I like your stuff better though, it must be really easy to write the conclusions.

    16. Re: I'm not surprised. by DamonHD · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Really, no. The word just implies that there is a problem with something.

      I use it all the time when talking about software or hardware bugs or latent ones, ie that may lead to or have already caused a problem. How on earth would that be what you claim?

      If you want "dog whistles" then let's try "dog whistle" and "SJW" as loaded terms...

      Rgds

      Damon

      --
      http://m.earth.org.uk/
    17. Re:I'm not surprised. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually I think her first response should have been to knock out his teeth.

      Ladies and gentlemen, this is sexism in action. No one - certainly not this poster - would suggest that a man should knock out a woman's teeth for propositioning him, no matter how inappropriate it might be. But violence against a man for the same cause is apparently perfectly acceptable.

    18. Re:I'm not surprised. by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 4, Interesting

      1. Apparently the boss did not make sex a condition of continued employment. He's her boss. That's ALWAYS implied or always the risk.

      Really? Then why was it OK when Bill Clinton had sex with an intern?

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    19. Re: I'm not surprised. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Funny

      The problem is people like you advocating violent responses.

      I think that people who can't spot hyperbole should be publically disembowled in the town square.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    20. Re:I'm not surprised. by Calydor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      clear sexual advances like these without invitation are a clear case of sexual harassment.

      So you want to ban any kind of sexual advances? I mean, do you want that people first ask before they ask about starting a relationship?

      I must be incredibly old-fashioned to think that getting to know someone, talking, finding common interests etc. should precede "Hey, wanna fuck me? My girlfriend is okay with it."

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    21. Re:I'm not surprised. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We're supposed to believe that because this is Uber, and because everything about Uber is evil, this is News For Nerds.

      This is news for nerds. Uber is a tech company, and the people that work there are nerds. I don't like vague accusations that tech companies are "sexist" because, while they are, I don't believe they are any more sexist than non-tech companies. But in this case, the accusations are not vague. Ms Fowler has made very specific accusations against specific people, and has hard evidence to back up what she is saying. Uber's behavior in dismissing her complaints was appalling.

  2. Re:Cake or death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you read the article you'll learn that HR lied about this being the first offense. It was just one of many.

  3. Re:Cake or death by omnichad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well that means that the summary didn't summarize - it changed the message.

  4. Re:Noob question by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

    How you downvote idiological articles on ./ ?

    From the Slashdot FAQ:

    Q: How do you downvote idiological (!) articles on ./ ?

    A: Start by not reading them. And if you do accidentally read an "idiological" article on "./", be sure to not post a comment on it, dumbfuck.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  5. Re:A bad way to start by DogDude · · Score: 4, Informative

    Oh, silly AC. Any boss asking any subordinate to fuck them is harassment.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  6. Re:Cake or death by DogDude · · Score: 4, Informative

    Would you advocate the same punishment if it was female looking for sex I wonder?

    Yes, I would. Immediate firing, no questions asked. Completely unacceptable, and if a person doesn't know that, that's just as good reason for letting that person go. Somebody with such poor decision making skills is a liability in many ways.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  7. Re:Cake or death by sootman · · Score: 4, Informative

    You and the morons who modded you up need to RTFA. Here, I'l bold the important parts so you don't have to work so hard.

    Over the next few months, I began to meet more women engineers in the company. As I got to know them, and heard their stories, I was surprised that some of them had stories similar to my own. Some of the women even had stories about reporting the exact same manager I had reported, and had reported inappropriate interactions with him long before I had even joined the company. It became obvious that both HR and management had been lying about this being "his first offense", and it certainly wasn't his last. Within a few months, he was reported once again for inappropriate behavior, and those who reported him were told it was still his "first offense".

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  8. Re:Cake or death by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Informative

    What's wrong with that? Does she want this guy immediately fired no question asked? If it really is a first offence tell him to knock it off and move on from there,

    You did not read the article, did you?

    It wasn't his first offence, although HR lied about this, claiming that it was.

    He didn't knock it off. Also, her career at the company was affected because she made the report.

    What he did should have resulted in an instant dismissal. Retaliation should have resulted in dismissals. Covering up the prior acts by the man should have resulted in dismissals in HR.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  9. Re: Jacobin Jeopardy by Entrope · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know, right? Communism never led to any abuses ever! Neither did theocracies, anarchy, or monarchies!

  10. This has to be a 4chan joke... by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    He was in an open relationship, he said, and his girlfriend was having an easy time finding new partners but he wasn't. He was trying to stay out of trouble at work, he said, but he couldn't help getting in trouble, because he was looking for women to have sex with. It was clear that he was trying to get me to have sex with him, and it was so clearly out of line that I immediately took screenshots of these chat messages and reported him to HR.

    No fucking way. This has got to be some kind of alt-right/4chan/cuck joke parody, right? Woman convinces beta male to have "open relationship" so she can fuck alphas on the side, SHOCKING beta with no game can't score, harasses actually capable women and helps ruin otherwise successful company.

    "Sluts and cucks ruin everything for everyone." This has to be a joke, right?

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  11. Re:What's wrong with this people? by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem was his wife. When she wanted an "open relationship" so she could fuck other guys he should have said "DROPPED" and found a faithful woman. Instead he said "okay..." and then went begging for sex from every other woman he encountered.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  12. Re:Jacobin Jeopardy by meta-monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It really does boggle my mind that people haven't figured out that the whole system of capitalism might as well be designed to create opportunities for abuse.

    It boggles my mind that people haven't figured out capitalism is the only system that introduces voluntary behavior such that one even has a hope of avoiding abuse. At least in a capitalist system when you're harassed you can quit, and inform others, and the business suffers. There's some kind of financial incentive to avoid tolerating harassment. Propensity for abuse is inherent to humanity, not the economic system.

    What happens when you're sexually harassed by your commie party official? Better put out or it's gulag for you, comrade.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  13. An allegation has been made. by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And it appears that Uber is investigating said allegation. We don't have enough information to know whether it happened or not. That's what investigations are for.

    After the Duke Lacross Lynching and the UVA rape hoax, I'm inclined to reserve judgement until an accusation becomes a lawsuit and is litigated.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  14. Re:Perhaps the constant overhype is the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why exactly would you expect to see sexism or racism that is not directed at you?

    The author of the article was being harassed through text messaging. Unless you are the recipient of those messages you have zero idea what's going on.

  15. How surprising! by jb_nizet · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Week after week, Uber shows that it doesn't give a shit about the law, whatever the country is.

    Week after week, Uber shows that it doesn't give a shit about its employees (or, as they claim, their independant drivers).

    Why would Uber management give a shit about this poor woman? Why do people accept to work for Uber, given the constant reminders that Uber doesn't respect any rule, nor anyone?

  16. Re:Cake or death by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

    This story proves you wrong. The guy who propositioned her has done it many times before, and many times since, with zero consequences. Apparently he was too valuable to the company, or they just didn't care.

    The other comments also prove you wrong. People are making nuanced arguments, suggesting that merely politely asking for a date once is not a problem, for example. The world is clearly not as polarized as you think.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  17. Sexism is just one aspect by nyri · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think the headline and summary gives a wrong impression. Sure, sexual harassment is tolerated but the wider picture the writing paints is about dysfunctional organisation. Specifically:

    • There was the sexual harassment that gets all the discussion.
    • One of the other sexist aspects is the fact that she was denied a transfer. This seems to be due to the some half assed policy to increase the number of women in organisation with the net effect that her transfer was blocked because her current manager wanted/needed women in his team.
    • The third documented "sexist" thing is not buying leather jackets to female employees due to larger unit price. I don't think the problem here is sexual in nature. This same could have happened to fat people or any other minority group. Don't get me wrong, the company is wrong in doing this and excluding a number of people of any sort of team building exercise is really bad. Especially when it's done to save a few hundred bucks.
    • The main problem with the Uber organisation seem to be the utter politicisation of all aspects of management. From the description I'm willing to guess that the organisation is filled with power hungry people, who in turn hire and promote others like them. You know the type. A corporate version of these all talk, no action politicians.
  18. Astroturfing Trolls by s.petry · · Score: 4, Informative

    The amount of Anonymous Cowards posting the same couple lines makes it obvious. This thread is being astroturfed.

    Women are making more money than men for the same job and same amount of work today, especially in cities. Stop reading a bogus 30 year old paper crafted for a narrative and check current reports. or This or This or This and of course This Interestingly most of these are LEFT leaning sites, not Right/Conservative.

    PolitiFact has given you the nuts and bolts about the 77 cents statistic -- you can read the two most important works in this area here and here. Basically, there is a wage gap, but it tends to disappear when you compare women and men in the exact same jobs who have the same levels of experience and education. (emphasis mine)

    Just like 60% of all College students are women, 56% of all College graduates with advanced degrees are women. Yet we continue to hear that we need more women in college.

    I'm an egalitarian, not a MRA. I also happen to believe in Socrates' definition of Philosopher, who must seek truth even at their own peril. Sadly the left avoids all truth and distorts everything they can for division and agenda.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Astroturfing Trolls by kilfarsnar · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sadly the left avoids all truth and distorts everything they can for division and agenda.

      You would have done better to leave this part out. It is not the "left" that does this, but people in general. It's pretty easy to find examples of this on the right as well. They elected Donal Trump, after all. Neither side of the political divide has a monopoly on subordinating the truth to their agenda.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    2. Re:Astroturfing Trolls by s.petry · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The larger number is the unadjusted amount. It's less of an issue because to some extent it is down to choices made, but to some extent it is also down to more systemic problems like the burden of child care tending to fall more on women than on men.

      Are you claiming systematic discrimination of men? 80% of all custody awards go to women, if not a bit higher. I'd agree that we need to look at systematic problems, but the lens should not be positioned in a biased starting point. FWIW, I am a single parent and raised my kid from 10mos without any assistance or support. Even though my ex got hooked on drugs and became physically abusive after my child was born (both proven in court), it was an extremely difficult court case because I'm a man. We had to settle on joint legal custody with me having sole physical custody to make the Judge happy. She fought for money, I fought for the best interest of my child.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  19. Re:Prove it! by kilfarsnar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I see an allegation with no facts. Anyone working in IT understands how to make a screenshot, if not how to log a chat session. Yet no evidence is presented, and what would the easiest thing be for this person to do? Save evidence, because sexual harassment is ILLEGAL.

    Your claim (repeated) that you have to be the victim to see sexual harassment on the scale she is claiming is moronic. It would be visible to at least everyone on that team. There would be more than one claim from more than one person if it was that rampant. In the event it was just her and she over-hyped the scale, she could have this thing called evidence. Yet there is no evidence, just allegations. I'll wait for the court case, and would be willing to bet a paycheck that no evidence is forthcoming.

    Sorry, but there are no groups of dudes hanging around conspiring on how to fuck over, and fuck, women in the company. Quite the opposite, since the virtue signalling SJWs are rampant in SF and would have busted the boss to make a name for themselves.

    You clearly didn't RTFA. She has extensive email and chat records to back up her claims. Yes, I am taking her word for it. But if you are accusing her of lying about it, it is you who need to provide evidence.

    And yes, there actually are groups of dudes conspiring how to fuck women at the company. Not at every company of course. But I have seen such things at jobs I have had.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  20. Re:Prove it! by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I see an allegation with no facts. Anyone working in IT understands how to make a screenshot, if not how to log a chat session. Yet no evidence is presented, and what would the easiest thing be for this person to do? Save evidence, because sexual harassment is ILLEGAL.

    The article mentions that she does indeed have that evidence. Why does she not present this evidence? Probably because to do so might be illegal. I believe she has the legal right to retain that documentation for the sole purpose of legal action (as either defendant or complainant) and no right to publish it (as it is technically copyright of Uber as she was work-for-hire at the time).

    If she was lying, Uber would most likely sue her for defamation/libel/slander in short order, and she would get burned because she wouldn't have the long trail of evidence that she mentioned in the article.

    Your claim (repeated) that you have to be the victim to see sexual harassment on the scale she is claiming is moronic. It would be visible to at least everyone on that team. There would be more than one claim from more than one person if it was that rampant.

    She explicitly states that there was, and that she had talked to several coworkers who had experienced it.

    Sorry, but there are no groups of dudes hanging around conspiring on how to fuck over, and fuck, women in the company.

    It doesn't have to be a conspiracy -- negative attitudes aren't conscious.

    Quite the opposite, since the virtue signalling SJWs are rampant in SF and would have busted the boss to make a name for themselves.

    For example: you're sexist, but you think you're not, because you think it's all "SJWs", rather than people who have been genuinely mistreated. In this case, the woman gives a very detailed account, directly referring to matters on company record. Within an hour of picking up the phone, Uber's legal team would have had enough information to know whether this was credible or not. As Uber's official response was "conducting an internal investigation" rather than "completely baseless", I don't believe her claims can be easily dismissed at this point. And yet you believe you are taking a rational approach, even though you are disregarding the facts at hand -- attitude, not conspiracy.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  21. Re:Donnie Downer by Creedo · · Score: 5, Informative

    After Ellen Pao, UNLV, Duke LaCrosse, and countless false police reports (resulting in legal action) about discrimination I'm waiting for evidence. Chat logs, screen shots, and email logs should be enough to prove the case. TFA reports no such evidence.

    So, you post this, but don't bother to read the actual account?
    From the actual account:

    It was clear that he was trying to get me to have sex with him, and it was so clearly out of line that I immediately took screenshots of these chat messages and reported him to HR.

    I know, I know, they cleverly hid it behind the first link in the story.

    --
    All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
  22. Re:Perhaps the constant overhype is the problem by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why exactly would you expect to see sexism or racism that is not directed at you?

    Because complaints would be directed through me. I work in a tech company, and over the years, I have dealt with about a dozen complaints. The thing is, they were never about the engineers, programmers, or other nerds. They were always about the salesmen, the marketing dept, or the warehouse crew. I am sure some nerds are misogynistic jerks, but I don't think that is common, and I believe it is actually less prevalent than in most other professions. My experience is that most nerds are welcoming to female co-workers, and judge them by their ability, not their gender. Ms Fowler's description of her experience at Uber sounds terrible, but I don't think Uber is typical of tech companies or representative of "nerd culture". She also describes a lot of backstabbing and chaos at Uber that have nothing to do with sexism, so it sounds like a very dysfunctional company on many levels.

  23. Re:Prove it! by AK+Marc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    She made s specific claim with regards to the *fact* she was harassed on her first day, and it was reported to HR her first day. If that fact-based claim is a lie, Uber should sue her. That they aren't, and haven't responded, is evidence that they don't object to her facts. Yes, silence is an admission of guilt (except in court). In fact, Uber has made confirming statements, where they are concerned. And they have explicitly not questioned the factual claims made.

    And complaints bout SJWs seem to exceed the number of SJWs. Try facts, rather than yous snowflake tantrums.