Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Former Female Oracle Employees Sue Company For Alleged Pay Discrimination (techcrunch.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the class-action dept.

Three female, former Oracle employees are suing Oracle for allegedly paying women less than men in similar jobs. Rong Jewett, Sophy Wang and Xian Murray filed a lawsuit August 28, seeking a class-action status to represent all other women who have worked at the company. TechCrunch reports: The lawsuit, first reported by The Information, alleges that Oracle discriminated against women by "systematically paying them lower wage rates than Oracle pays to male employees performing substantially equal or similar work under similar working conditions," the filing states. The time period the lawsuit references is four years prior to the filing and through the date of the trial in California. Referencing how the U.S. Department of Labor sued Oracle in January based on its compliance review that found "systemic discrimination against women" and "gross disparities in pay," the lawsuit states Oracle had known or should have known about the pay disparity between its male and female employees. The plaintiffs are seeking wages due, interest and liquidated damages plus interest. They also want Oracle to guarantee they won't pay women less than men for similar work in the future.

67 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. Formerly female employees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Kushners?

    1. Re:Formerly female employees? by bluelip · · Score: 1

      Bruce Jenner hasn't been invited back to be on a Wheaties box since he had his revelation. He should sue for bias discrimination.

      --

      Yep, I never spell check.
      More incorrect spellings can be found he
    2. Re:Formerly female employees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That was bogus data in Lexus-Nexis. When people bothered to check the actual form, he was correctly listed as male.

      But who cares about tracking down the original data? They're already on to different headlines. At best, a correction will be posted on page 93.

  2. Being Black, White, X, Y.... by bluelip · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...it does not matter. Put in the hard work. Keep your head down and solve problems. If you're not getting what you deserve, move elsewhere. Your skills are obviously, at least in your mind, in great demand so landing a better job will be easy.

    --

    Yep, I never spell check.
    More incorrect spellings can be found he
    1. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by rudy_wayne · · Score: 1

      Unless you are a lazy slob with no skills.

      Then you get what you want by constantly complaining of "discrimination".

    2. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by bluelip · · Score: 2

      Youth has got nothing much to offer. The youngsters don't have a clue and want "check this box" solutions. Hence the reason to come back to a job and fix what the 'solutions' the youth implemented, for a substantial fee.

      --

      Yep, I never spell check.
      More incorrect spellings can be found he
    3. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... Youth has got nothing much to offer.

      It's got lower wages, it's got an absence of responsibilities. Employers also see young people as needing fewer sick days and being easier to train; despite evidence to the contrary. Employers want employees to be experienced or cheap. That's why one is one's last job: The next job will depend on that experience. The flaws in this being one can have years of experience with little change in skill, and most skills translate into other industries, regardless of experience (with military service being an obvious exception).

    4. Re: Being Black, White, X, Y.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh, and if they refuse to compete, all I have to do is identify as a woman (we all can) on the employment forms to fuck their cheap attempts at taking jobs without the skillsets over.

    5. Re: Being Black, White, X, Y.... by bettodavis · · Score: 1

      And you don't even have to dress up or put on the makeup.

      "Are you assuming my gender expression?" while tilting your head with an eye roll is the right response to anyone trying to call your out.

    6. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      ... tech companies are not hiring.

      The unemployment rate for programmers is 2.5%. The rate for all occupations is 4.4%.

    7. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh No! It's Asshole Bill!

      Like fuck the unemployment rate is 2.5% you fucking liar. You're deliberately not counting former programmers who were forced out of programming for being old, white, and male. Many of whom never worked again in any field, and are not counted as unemployed because they were forcibly eliminated from employed society by assholes like you. Unemployment is 2.5% for BROWN, BROWN, BROWN, you goddamed lying turd. Programming is for brown people now, and only brown people, you fucking shit stain.

      If the total unemployment rate is 4.4%, explain how the Labor Participation Rate has fallen to 62.9% the same as it was in 1977. Explain the FORTY YEAR LOW in employment, you motherfucking asshole.

      You're a lying sack of shit, Bill. Fuck you, Bill.

      FUCK EVERYONE, BILL GOT HIS.

    8. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      explain how the Labor Participation Rate has fallen to 62.9%

      Demographics: Boomers are retiring.

    9. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No one should have to leave their job because their employer is institutionally biased against them. Especially when there is a good chance that they new employer will be the same, and it's hard to tell if they will be because everyone claims to meet their legal obligation to be fair.

      "Just leave town" is not an answer, it's divisive and unfair.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Has it been tried, though? Perhaps work for an employer with a strong commitment to social justice, like Google. Oh wait they're getting sued for paying women less, too. Oops. Maybe the world you wish existed is an unworkable utopia. Try measuring things against how they are in the real world, instead of measuring them against a dream.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    11. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I don't think anything ever improved by people saying "eh, that's just how it is, what can we do?"

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Pretending things are horrid when they're not is a hallmark of Leftist bullshit for decades.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Are you saying that gender discrimination is not bad, or that it doesn't happen?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re: Being Black, White, X, Y.... by firbolgar · · Score: 1

      With military service being an exception huh? I'll just assume you're ignorant so here's a quick list to enlighten you. Infantry, Military Police => Police Military Intel => National Intel, Public Policy Military Mechanic => Aviation Mechanic Military Food Service => Catering, Restaurant Mgr Military Transportation => FedEx (drivers through corporate planning) .... I could go on and on

    15. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The truth is -- the truth is complicated. It is *true* that the ability to take your labor other places is a help in facing discrimination, but it is *also* true that some discriminatory attitudes are so widespread that your options for doing so may be limited.

      This is easy to understand when it's your own ox being gored; somewhat less so when other people are the one affected. Think of your own jobs; has management by in large been competent and rational? If so, your experience is unusual. If not, chances are you'll experience similar management if you change jobs. The most commonplace human level of achievement in any endeavor is mediocrity.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    16. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      just makes you sound like a white male who has never had to experience the kinds of things other people contend with on a daily basis.

      What? Seriously'?

      You think "white guys" have never had the problems you described above:

      "You may stay at a shitty job because you have a family to support, or ailing relatives you care for. You may be living paycheck to paycheck, where you manage to get by, but you have basically zero savings, and can't afford to take time off your current job to look/interview for a new one. There's a myriad of possible reasons why someone might keep a shitty job where they're not paid what they're worth, treated like dirt, etc."

      Seriously, you think this situation happens to everyone except white guys?

      Man, open your eyes, this is called LIFE, and it happens to almost EVERYONE, no matter your sex or race.

      You might wanna lay off there Kool-Aid the skippy....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    17. Re: Being Black, White, X, Y.... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Presumably none of these jobs teach punctuation.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    18. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by microbox · · Score: 1

      This is what happens when you teach people to be victims. And the lawsuit is what happens when the radical left takes over large sections of the legal profession.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    19. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by microbox · · Score: 1

      I don't think anything ever improved by people saying "eh, that's just how it is, what can we do?"

      That is a false dichotomy. Incrementalism is about grounding change in what we know works, and being realistic and cautious.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    20. Re:Being Black, White, X, Y.... by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      ...it does not matter. Put in the hard work. Keep your head down and solve problems. If you're not getting what you deserve, move elsewhere. Your skills are obviously, at least in your mind, in great demand so landing a better job will be easy.

      Ellison has a 100foot yacht. Needed the skimmed money to cover the 10 man crew salaries. Crew is used to maintain it.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  3. How do they find out what the men are making? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 1

    Do they poll a group of men of the same grade and group as them?

    1. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is a civil suit. So they can subpoena that information during the discovery phase. In civil court there is no "presumption of innocence" nor any protection against self incrimination. So they can go in with no evidence, force Oracle to divulge data, and then use that data against them. This is they way civil law has worked for centuries. If Oracle kept proper records, and did not discriminate, they should be able to get the lawsuit dismissed. Otherwise, they should seek a settlement. You never want a jury trial in a case like this. Juries tend to include bitter careerless women who have had their dreams crushed by reality, and they will have little sympathy for a soulless corporation ... and no corporation is more soulless than Oracle.

    2. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by Shados · · Score: 1

      This will be interesting. Oracle has a LOT of lawyer power...

      But the numbers almost certainly show a disparity, and the usual counter arguments come into play (are they paid less because they do less hours, choose different roles even though they say its for equal roles, did they negotiate less?), but proving anything on either side on those fronts is really hard.

    3. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      are they paid less because they do less hours

      If Oracle can document that, that is a reasonable defense.

      choose different roles even though they say its for equal roles

      If they are doing different work, then they should have different titles, and different job descriptions.

      did they negotiate less?

      No. That is not a legitimate defense. It is illegal to systematically pay men and women differently for doing the same work. Unless Oracle was hiring professional negotiators, "ability to negotiate" is not related to the job and is not a legal justification for pay disparity.

    4. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by Shados · · Score: 1

      If Oracle can document that, that is a reasonable defense

      Salaried employees. Unless managers are taking notes and keeping track of them at all time (which would make the average software engineer straight up quit), all they can see is output, and they wouldn't keep track unless it was cause for significant concern, just not give promotions (that part is probably documented)

      If they are doing different work, then they should have different titles, and different job descriptions.

      I'm really looking forward to everyone having a unique title for every possible permutation of engineering role: "Sorry, you're a Messaging Platform Software Engineer III. That doesn't pay as much as the Document Platform Software Engineer II"

      It is illegal to systematically pay men and women differently for doing the same work

      And this is where things get interesting, since aside for burger flippers, that's how the world works.

      I can already see it: "We're offering you $X" "Well, I guess I'm gonna go work elsewhere" "Wait!!! We can talk about this...actually nevermind, we can't >."

    5. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by fafalone · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No. That is not a legitimate defense. It is illegal to systematically pay men and women differently for doing the same work. Unless Oracle was hiring professional negotiators, "ability to negotiate" is not related to the job and is not a legal justification for pay disparity.

      So basically, if a man goes to boss and says 'My value to this company is under-recognized and I want a raise', the boss must either deny it or then give everyone the same raise? If men are more likely to do that (and evidence suggests they are; facts don't stop being facts because they offend social justice), it would become systemic eventually. If women of equal merit asked for the same amounts at the same rate but were more likely to be denied, that would be discrimination, but that's a different scenario.

    6. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by mark-t · · Score: 2

      But the numbers almost certainly show a disparity

      Two words:

      Confirmation bias.

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    7. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1, Informative

      So basically, if a man goes to boss and says 'My value to this company is under-recognized and I want a raise', the boss must either deny it or then give everyone the same raise?

      No, not "everyone". Only members of legally protected classes. You can't pay men and women systematically differently for the same work. You can't pay blacks and whites systematically differently for the same work.

      If men are more likely to do that (and evidence suggests they are; facts don't stop being facts because they offend social justice), it would become systemic eventually.

      Indeed, and that is illegal.

      If women of equal merit asked for the same amounts at the same rate but were more likely to be denied, that would be discrimination, but that's a different scenario.

      It is discrimination whether they "ask for it" or not. YOU CAN NOT PAY MEN AND WOMEN SYSTEMATICALLY DIFFERENTLY FOR THE SAME WORK. If you pay men more because they "ask for it" then you are breaking the law and you are going to get sued.

      HR needs to periodically review average salaries for every legally protected class. If there is a systematic difference in pay, then they need to fix that. They can give raises to the underpaid, or withhold raises from the overpaid, offset the differences in bonuses, or whatever. But what they can't do is PAY MEN AND WOMEN SYSTEMATICALLY DIFFERENTLY FOR THE SAME WORK. That is illegal.

    8. Re: How do they find out what the men are making? by loufoque · · Score: 2

      How about different men paid systematically different for the same work?

    9. Re: How do they find out what the men are making? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      How about different men paid systematically different for the same work?

      If they are members of a Protected Class then it is illegal to pay them systematically differently for the same work. Protected classes include race, gender, religion, etc. So if you pay black men and white men systematically differently for the same work, that is illegal.

      If the difference is not legal protected, then you can discriminate. For instance, you can pay tall men less than short men since height is not a legally protected class. You can refuse to hire smokers. You can fire someone for wearing a nose ring. None of these are protected.

      Disclaimer: I am not saying this is the way it "should be". I am just saying that, according to the law, this is the way it is.

    10. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      I can already see it: "We're offering you $X" "Well, I guess I'm gonna go work elsewhere" "Wait!!! We can talk about this...actually nevermind, we can't >."

      You can negotiate with individuals. You just need to make sure that the average salary for men and the average for women is the same if they are doing the same work.

    11. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What. The. Fuck. Does. This. Even. Mean.

      So you negotiate with two dudes to keep them on board, so you, what, just give across the board raises to women ?

      And which demographics do we have to make sure to keep equal ? Is it just men/women ? Is it blacks/whites/latinos/asian?

      Or is it now chinese/japanese/vietnamese/australian/european whatever that we have to keep equal ? Why is it that the italians make 4% more at this company than the germans? Shit - I'm italian and german.

      Should we make sure that short and tall have "equal" pay (across averages, I guess?) - fat and skinny ? Ugly and good looking ? This is fucking Ice-9 in a bizarre HR world all over it.

      Good luck with all of that. I will continue to not worry about it.

    12. Re: How do they find out what the men are making? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      How about different men paid systematically different for the same work?

      It's really pretty simple.

      1. Are those people doing basically the same kinds of jobs?
      2. Does that difference correlate with a protected class?

      If the answer to 1 and 2 is "yes" then you're doing something illegal and need to sort your shit out. The law doesn't care for your "but what if" scenarios or the reasons you're doing it, or how you got there. All it cares about is those two question.

      You now have enough information to answer your hypothetical question.

      If you are still unclear then I suggest you leave whatever management position you are in or take a class on the law because you're heading for a massive fuckup if you don't.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    13. Re: How do they find out what the men are making? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Depends on the reason for them being paid different amounts. If it's age it could be problem. If it's just that one is less qualified then maybe not, legally speaking.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1

      You can negotiate with individuals. You just need to make sure that the average salary for men and the average for women is the same if they are doing the same work...

      ..or that you have clear, legal reasons for that pay disparity. It's perfectly legal to pay men more on average if you can demonstrate that the disparity comes from seniority, quantity of production, a merit system (that meets certain requirements), or (to quote the EPA) "a differential based on any other factor other than sex". Also please note that because it's the legal system, "any other factor" doesn't literally mean "any other factor".

      If you are a CEO, work in HR, or even work as a manager, then you need to understand the law.

      Yes, you do. But unless you're a lawyer who specializes in this area of the law please don't rely on your own surface understanding of the legal requirements.

    15. Re: How do they find out what the men are making? by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1

      It's really pretty simple. ... If the answer to 1 and 2 is "yes" then you're doing something illegal and need to sort your shit out.

      It's wasn't that simple even when the EPA was passed. Please see the list in Section 3(d)(1).

      A hint to the mods: -1 is not for "I don't like the law you've just correctly explained to me".

      You're over-simplifying a complex area of the legal system and a half-century of case law down to a single "if" statement. You also seem to think that the legal system blindly believes that correlation is causation. Either one of those would justify the down-modding.

    16. Re: How do they find out what the men are making? by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Instead of killing them, let's use the technique Mao employed on anti-revoltionary village chiefs. Force them to wear a dunce cap, and tie them up on a wagon. Then parade them around town so workers and peasants can throw rotten fruit at them. This technique is said to be most effective at destroying the social authority of the former exploiting classes.

    17. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      maybe...JUST maybe... the concept of "protected classes" has created this mess.

      how about we break it down to the smallest minority - The individual???

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    18. Re:How do they find out what the men are making? by fafalone · · Score: 1

      No, not "everyone". Only members of legally protected classes. You can't pay men and women systematically differently for the same work. You can't pay blacks and whites systematically differently for the same work.

      It actually would be "everyone" unless men and women asked for and were given raises at the same rate. But since they're not, you're basically claiming nobody is allowed to ask for a raise unless it's for everyone (you can't systematically pay men less either). The rest of your comment seems to represent a misunderstanding of the law. A disparity existing in and of itself is *not* illegal. Look at hiring discrimination: it's illegal to discriminate based on gender or color. But there's numerous jobs that are nearly all men or women. Is that illegal? Not if that was simply the pool of qualified applicants. Same principle applies.
      It's the same thing with salary. You're saying the law requires equality of outcome. It does not. It requires equality of opportunity. Men and women have to be equally able to ask for and receive raises for the same merit. Simply put, it's the old correlation vs. causation thing. There has to be causation, that the correlation exists *because* of their gender/race/whatever.
      When your comment is filled with all caps like you're yelling something obvious, make sure it's actually right, you flaming imbecile. That you've repeated your ignorance a bunch of other times is even worse. That's what happens when you play internet lawyer, you make people stupider, and /. isn't the place for that.

  4. Caution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hiring women can be dangerous to your company's health!

    1. Re:Caution! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Not hiring women can be dangerous to your company's health.

      If your company had very few female employees people are going to ask why, possibly in court. If you have an actual policy of not hiring women you are in real trouble.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  5. O.R.A.C.L.E. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Come on girl, you knew what you where signing on for, ORACLE is as advertised,

    One Raging Asshole Called Larry Ellison

  6. Demonstrably false by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Check out the percentage of the company that identifies as female: 29%

    If they were paid less, there would be a financial incentive to employ more of them.

    1. Re:Demonstrably false by jordanjay29 · · Score: 1

      Or it just speaks to a culture of discriminatory hiring practices?

    2. Re:Demonstrably false by jordanjay29 · · Score: 1

      That assumes the hiring manager assumes female work is equal to male. The discrimination works in both ways, neither are women viewed as equal in work quality, but neither also in compensation worth. It's not someone just taking advantage of gender inequality in pay, it's a fundamental world view about gender inequality through and through.

    3. Re:Demonstrably false by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Axiom: the free market is perfect.

      Therefore the free market prevents pay discrimination!

      The problem with your conclusion is it's predicated on the perfection of the free market. Since the free market is demonstrably not perfect it does not follow that the free market will correct all pricing disparities.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Demonstrably false by jordanjay29 · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'm sure the white male dominance is threatened by 29% of the employee population at Oracle. Go find another tree to bark up.

    5. Re:Demonstrably false by jordanjay29 · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry the world doesn't revolve around you. Better you learned that now than later.

  7. Well well, here we are in the current year... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is the time for the American Anti-SJWs to shine. Christina Hoff-Summers, her proxies like Ben Shapiro and Milo and her elders like Tomas Sowell, all claim that there is no discrimination against women and doing the the math right shows it.

    There are, of course, other considerations and implications from this lawsuit. The idea that employee A has to get what employee B gets, or even in the ball-park of what B gets is a basic communist, ideological, evil. AFAIK americans never stay at their jobs if they find a better paying spot. So claiming that it is a "class" thing will be hard to prove. Another implication is the basic (and peculiar) american ideological concept called "A deal is a deal". If you freely sign a contract, thus striking a deal, going back and asking for more through courts is trying to chip away at the original concept. Your whole country is based on the idea that a deal is a deal. Sure damage can be done, proven and compensated for by courts but chip enough foundation away and it's pretty much legal chaos.

    This will be very entertaining, Best of luck to all involved :-)

    1. Re:Well well, here we are in the current year... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Jobs don't have anything to do with Communism. Communism is government control of the means of production. It has nothing to do with equality of salary. Who told you it did? Your whole ideology is based on a fallacy.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Well well, here we are in the current year... by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1

      That a supplier provides a service at the same cost for all people

      Senior discounts are illegal?

      a Starbucks coffee costs the same on Tuesday, that it did on Monday

      Sales and weekend discounts are illegal?

      it costs a rich person, the same it costs a poor person

      Outside of getting credit that's usually true, but that's because there's usually no reason to do that and in most of the exceptions credit score is even more useful.

      responsibility to pay a standard price

      I don't think that exists, legally or morally. Even discrimination law doesn't expect such a thing.

    3. Re:Well well, here we are in the current year... by bsolar · · Score: 1

      Senior discounts are illegal?

      Not to mention gender price disparities. As example ladies’ night are effectively a form of gender-based price discrimination and depending on local regulation can be perfectly legal.

    4. Re: Well well, here we are in the current year... by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      No, this is demand based discrimination. Not the same.

    5. Re: Well well, here we are in the current year... by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      I live in Canada, and I've heard many times growing up, a doctor in Cuba makes the same as anyone else. How the fuck would I know if that's true? I don't, just saying what I've heard many, many times.

  8. Overly specific wording by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They also want Oracle to guarantee they won't pay women less than men for similar work in the future.

    Why not a guarantee Oracle will pay women and men the same instead of a mere guarantee that women wont be paid less than men?

    Why is an outcome where women are being paid more than men an acceptable outcome for people "suing for equality".

    1. Re:Overly specific wording by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      The problem with such guarantees is that you can't guarantee anything - if a woman takes a year long maternity break, and her equal-job male coworker does not, the male coworker ends up being a year ahead on advancement, experience etc, so any equal-pay guarantee made on any basis other than raw time-with-company will end up with women who choose to bear children being paid less.

      Is that fair? Is anything that attempts to modify that "discrimination" fair?

      That's the debate being had in some areas.

  9. class action is a farce by Orgasmatron · · Score: 4, Funny

    The lawyers are going to clear a quarter billion, and each of the employees is going to get a coupon for 25% off their next database.

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
  10. Re:Considering how hard women are to find... by Trondheim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't a hiring freeze on men patently illegal?

  11. Backfire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As a small business owner I am afraid of hiring women because I am afraid they will perceive some non existent injustice and drag my ass into court

    I did not always feel this way

  12. Ugh. Hideous headline by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Former Female Oracle Employees Sue Company"

    Former Female? What were they before? Perhaps you might mean "Female Former Oracle Employees Sue Company."

    1. Re: Ugh. Hideous headline by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Careful, /. editors don't like it when it's pointed out a grade 7 student would be a better editor than these clowns.

  13. Re:Ugh. Hideous headline by fafalone · · Score: 1

    Did you just assume their cis/trans status!?!!?!?!? You're literally Hitler.

  14. Young women earn more than men (US big cities) by Kartu · · Score: 1

    The research, completed by the Department of Sociology at Queens College in New York, showed full-time female employees in their 20s surpassing same-age males in cities like Chicago, Boston, Minneapolis, Dallas and New York.

    In Dallas, these women earn 20 percent more than men, while in New York City they earn 17 percent more.

    https://www.reuters.com/articl...

    Is this enough to claim young men in Dallas and New York are being discriminated, or "it is more complicated"/

    And even more complicated (the same source):

    The study suggested those gains might be based on the fact that women get married later in cities than in rural areas. Women marry the latest in New York, Massachusetts and the District of Columbia.