Google Hit With Gender Pay Discrimination Lawsuit (axios.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Three female former Google employees have filed a lawsuit against the search giant alleging gender-based pay discrimination, as the Associated Press reported. The former employees, Kelly Ellis, Holly Pease and Kelli Wisuri, all left the company after being put on career paths within the company that they say would pay them less than their male counterparts.

Comments

Enjoy

[Tailhook]

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of grievance mongers.

It's because of social justice activism

[Anonymous Coward]

Google is infamously left-wing. That's the *reason* they're being sued. It sounds counter-intuitive, but it's true. Hear me out.

I work at Google. You'll find no real sexism here. What you will find is unending leftist propaganda. There's a weekly microaggression newsletter, even. The constant drumbeat is "You are a victim! You are being oppressed! The world is arrayed against everyone except white men!"

Now, when you put a normal well adjusted person in this environment, he or she starts to believe the propaganda and attribute any adverse circumstances to his or her identity group, not to his or her individual abilities and choices. The non-stop social justice narrative teaches people to see everything as a social justice grievance.

So is it any wonder that some women at Google started to really believe that they were being oppressed and sued? You reap what you sow.

Re:It's because of social justice activism

[bobbied]

Me too...

There is more than a little bit of truth in the original post. Of course, being a older white male, there is zero chance that I can attain enough standing in this debate to have my opinion count.

Re:It's because of social justice activism

[NicknameUnavailable]

An unverified AC making bold claims... Excuse me if I don't take your word for it.

It's entirely possible he just likes his paycheck. From literally every story about and leak out of Google they will hunt down and destroy the professional lives of anyone even so much as not stating what the AC said in a positive light.

Re:It's because of social justice activism

[DNS-and-BIND]

We all saw what Google does to people who put their real names on dissenting opinions. The GP comment is correct to post anonymously. Non-anonymous speech has real consequences. Reaction by Googlers to this kind of wrongthink:

"Do you understand that at this point, I could not in good conscience assign anyone to work with you? I certainly couldn't assign any women to deal with this, a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face, and even if there were a group of like-minded individuals I could put you with, nobody would be able to collaborate with them."

Re:It's because of social justice activism

[Anonymous Coward]

Reality check: when you don't play by the rules, you get kicked out.

"Speak the truth" is NOT one of the rules. "Pay lip service to the company line" very much IS one of the rules. Most adults of average intelligence know this.

You want to stand up for what you believe is right? Be prepared to suffer the consequences.

Dem's the rules.

Re:It's because of social justice activism

[PoopMonkey]

How well did it go for the last person who criticized google with their name attached?

Re:It's because of social justice activism

[computational super]

That's the fundamental problem with the SJW ideology - it's never enough. You could kill every white man alive, and the SJW's would still be unsatisfied.

Re: It's because of social justice activism

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe some white men just want to ensure that everyone has the same rights -- including white men. I honestly don't care if my grandfather oppressed your grandfather (he didn't, but that's another matter), I am not oppressing you and that's all that should matter.

Perhaps if the whole lot of you weren't hell-bent on "turning the tables of oppression" and, instead, cared about the equality that we all deserve, you'd get farther.

Re:Settles in for Reasoned Debate

[ganjadude]

building up quite the strawmen there

Re:Settles in for Reasoned Debate

[DNS-and-BIND]

This sure is an inconvenient story, isn't it? Google, that solidly left-wing company, so left that they fired a man for a very well written and calm critique of Googleâ(TM)s policies (with rather decent suggestions to improve things, mind you). He argued that Google was becoming an "ideological echo chamber" where right-of-center views weren't welcome. He was dismissed for creating a hostile work environment, proving the point. Now Google is being sued for not being far enough left. Google may well end up arguing the exact same points the memo author made in court. I'm making the popcorn, this is going to be a great show.

Re:OH! WOMEN!

[HornWumpus]

Prohibition. And yes absolutely, the woman suffragists _were_ largely the same group as the temperance societies.

Worse, they did it while the young men were away fighting WWI and couldn't practically vote. Talk about a kick in the teeth when you got back.

Re: Settles in for Reasoned Debate

[RLaager]

Can you point to where he suggested "separate but equal"?

It seems to me that he was advocating for equal treatment. Specifically, that the jobs should be changed for everyone. He talked about "pair programming and more collaboration", being less competitive and "allow[ing] those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive", etc. None of those suggestions said anything about creating separate roles for women.

He also talked about opening up the gender/race restricted programs to everyone. Assuming such programs exist (and nobody has said they don't), Google currently doesn't even have "separate but equal", but simply "separate".