Slashdot Mirror


Tesla Is a 'Hotbed For Racist Behavior,' Worker Claims In Lawsuit (bloomberg.com)

An African-American employee has filed a lawsuit against Tesla, claiming their production floor is a "hotbed for racist behavior" and that black workers at the electric carmaker suffer severe and pervasive harassment. "The employee says he's one of more than 100 African-American Tesla workers affected and is seeking permission from a judge to sue on behalf of the group," reports Bloomberg. "He's seeking unspecified general and punitive monetary damages as well as an order for Tesla to implement policies to prevent and correct harassment." From the report: "Although Tesla stands out as a groundbreaking company at the forefront of the electric car revolution, its standard operating procedure at the Tesla factory is pre-Civil Rights era race discrimination," the employee said in the complaint, filed Monday in California's Alameda County Superior Court. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Marcus Vaughn, who worked in the Fremont factory from April 23 to Oct. 31. Vaughn alleged that employees and supervisors regularly used the "N word" around him and other black colleagues. Vaughn said he complained in writing to human resources and Musk and was terminated in late October for "not having a positive attitude."

300 comments

  1. Racism sucks... fight back by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm glad to live in a country where a guy like this can sue the Tesla. Hopefully, he had the presence of mind to record them or get some hard evidence. EEOC complaints can be an effective avenue, so can a discrimination lawsuit. The only way to stop this kind of behavior is to bow-up and fight back.

    1. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on the type of guy he is. If he's actually being discriminated against, I'm glad to live in a country where he can sue for it. If he's not being discriminated against, and is suing because he can extort money from Tesla with the help of a bigoted court system, then I'm sorry I live in a country where that's possible.

    2. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by sycodon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Tesla is such an SJW company.

      Crazy.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    3. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Or if he's having his legal bills and other arrangements funded by Tesla's competitors and enemies, and doesn't need to win so much as slander them... definitely not proud to be an american.

    4. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The reality is that we live in a world that every last lawsuit against Tesla (something that happens against all companies) will be extensively covered by the media, without any coverage of the outcome of the suits - which so far have all been in Tesla's favour.

      --
      The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not âEureka!â(TM), but
    5. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by thomst · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seven Spirals announced:

      I'm glad to live in a country where a guy like this can sue the Tesla. Hopefully, he had the presence of mind to record them or get some hard evidence. EEOC complaints can be an effective avenue, so can a discrimination lawsuit. The only way to stop this kind of behavior is to bow-up and fight back.

      I'm glad to live in a country where the legal system provides a means of redress for harassment in the workplace - which is not quite the same thing you seem to be happy about.

      As one of those rare /.ers who actually reads TFA which TFS summarizes (ahem), let me point out a couple of key quotes that are not included in the clickbait summary, above:

      A Tesla assembly line worker sued in March, claiming the company did little to stop co-workers from harassing him. In August, a judge sent the case to arbitration. A judge also partly granted Tesla’s request to compel arbitration in a case of a woman who sued in November 2016 complaining about pervasive harassment.

      At a guess (and this is only a guess, because I haven't read the judge's order), the judge in the first case sent the case to arbitration because the evidence against Tesla was something short of compelling. But, let's continue:

      According to Monday’s complaint, Musk sent an email to Tesla factory employees on May 31.

      "Part of not being a huge jerk is considering how someone might feel who is part of [a] historically less represented group." Musk wrote in the email. "Sometimes these things happen unintentionally, in which case you should apologize. In fairness, if someone is a jerk to you, but sincerely apologizes, it is important to be thick-skinned and accept that apology."

      "The law doesn’t require you to have a thick skin," [the plaintiff's attorney] said in an interview Monday. "Tesla is not doing enough. It’s somewhat akin to saying ‘stop being politically correct.’ When you have a diverse workforce, you need to take steps to make sure everyone feels welcome in that workforce."

      The first two paragraphs make it pretty clear that Musk disapproves of casual expressions of racism. His general memos carry more than a little weight at his company. Ask any of his employees about that.

      The third paragraph presents the plaintiff's attorney's opinion as fact. That's a commonplace lawyerly PR tactic designed to allow the barrister to define the bounds of the dispute. Any competent judge is going to ignore it, and instruct the jury to ignore it, as well, because, under the law, you do not have to "take steps to make sure everyone feels welcome in that workplace." What you have to do is take whatever steps are necessary to end racial harrassment of the plaintiff in your workplace - which is not quite the same thing.

      The fact that the attorney in question has applied to the judge for class action status makes it quite clear that he, at least, understands that at least as well as I do. (IANAL) Whether the jurist who's hearing the case will grant that status is a good question. Unless I miss my guess, his decision whether to do so will depend heavily on the case the plaintiff's lawyer makes for pervasive racial harassment at Tesla during pre-trial hearings.

      What we actually, verifiably know is that Marcus Vaughn, who worked at Tesla for six months, is suing Tesla in Alameda County Superior Court for allegedly failing to prevent racial discrimination against him, and that his lawyer, Larry Organ, an attorney at the California Civil Rights Law Group, has petitioned the judge to award his case class action status. That's it, that's all. Presuming culpability on Tesla's part is premature, to say the least, particularly in view of a previous case making the same general allegations having been referred by the judge to binding arbitration, rather than being permitted to g

      --
      Check out my novel.
    6. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All in Tesla's favor? Like Tesla's lawsuits against Ecotricity and Top Gear?

      No, wait...

      And that isn't even getting into their dealership issues.

    7. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by sexconker · · Score: 3, Informative

      Learn to read. Rei referred to the lawsuits against Tesla,meaning Tesla was the defendant.
      And from context it's clear Rei is referring to all the harassment/ism-based lawsuits.

    8. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by sexconker · · Score: 2

      The third paragraph presents the plaintiff's attorney's opinion as fact. That's a commonplace lawyerly PR tactic designed to allow the barrister to define the bounds of the dispute. Any competent judge is going to ignore it, and instruct the jury to ignore it, as well, because, under the law, you do not have to "take steps to make sure everyone feels welcome in that workplace." What you have to do is take whatever steps are necessary to end racial harrassment of the plaintiff in your workplace - which is not quite the same thing.

      Absolutely correct.

      Hostile work environments, harassment, etc. aren't about being mean, insensitive, etc. You can be an ass to your employees all you want, as long as you're fair about it.
      You can't have a pattern (or an extreme isolated incident) of targeting individuals or groups.

    9. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hon, if you didn't experience racism until M, A in '61, you didn't live in the northern cities of Chicago, Detroit, New Jersey, etc. I never experienced racism that extreme before.

    10. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Dread_ed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Its not like the National Automobile Dealers Association hasn't tried to get laws changed to prevent Tesla from selling their cars. I wouldn't put it past them to arrange some shit like this.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    11. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by negRo_slim · · Score: 1

      "bow-up"?

      Is that like an "epic clap back"?

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    12. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should try being white in rural North Carolina's Tabaco country... Holy cow... Try to buy a hamburger from some place with less than strict customer service standards... Talk about getting just a taste of racism...

    13. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PSA: It's only ok to use the word nigg...r if your skin is black. Black skin is associated with a genetic trait which prevents a person from being able to be racist.
      Blacks aren't racist against Whites and Koreans, it's just that those races are inferior to them.

    14. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Charcharodon · · Score: 3, Interesting
      What also is great when it turns out to be a frivolous lawsuit he has to pay Tesla's legal bills. Isn't America wonderful?

      Some of the items he is complaining about:

      Having to show up to work on time.
      Having to be productive at work.
      Not being able to blame his poor work performance on "racist crackers"
      Being openly hostile towards his co-workers and then not getting invited out for beer after going on daily rants about how racists everyone is around here
      The fact that they actually expect him to come to work during Black History Month instead of attending "whitey is a racists workshops"

      Oh wait I'm confusing this guy with guys that I had to serve with while I was in the Air Force.

      Hey maybe he has a point or more likely he was told that his performance sucked and if he didn't shape up he would be let go during next year's round of low performer culling.

    15. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the UAW, paying for someone to be an agitator and try to pressure the business to stop resisting unionization in order to make the bad headlines go away.

      "That's a nice car factory youse got there - it'd be a shame if sometin was to happen to it..."

    16. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Don't worry - it's no better in urban southern Ohio.

      One of the first things that opened my eyes when I moved here from Portland, is the casual racism (read: incredible ignorance) that some people display.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    17. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Confused_Enemy · · Score: 1

      In fairness, if someone is a jerk to you, but sincerely apologizes, it is important to be thick-skinned and accept that apology

      Fucking bullshit. If someone is a jerk it is most likely to happen again and again until something gives. The person quoted is a jerk, after all. Feelings get hurt and the jerk behaves like a jerk KNOWING they are a jerk and only showing remorseful behaviour when the gig is up. There is no sincerity on this planet that can be shown by a jerk. Saying someone is a jerk and that you should suck up on an apology is akin to saying a murderer didn't mean to kill that person ONLY on the possibility that the remorseful action grants a lesser sentence. BULLSHIT. Musk's attitude closely reflects his life story as a narcissistic TRUMPeting tweeter who fumbled into paypal to gain rise to success. That guy is THE definition of jerk.

    18. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you can target individuals or groups. It just can't be because that individual or group is a member of a protected class under federal law (race, religion, sex, etc.).

      If you target them because they fucking suck at their job, or because they're a god damn douchebag idiot that's perfectly fine though not necessarily job performance related.

    19. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by datavirtue · · Score: 0

      Unless they are white males under the age of 44. They are not protected by federal laws that define hostile work enviornments.....if fact it is our duty to brave the harassment of others with a thick skin.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    20. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tesla is such an SJW company.

      What's amusing about all the "America, f*ck yeah!" folks complaining about Tesla being all "SJW" is the fact that of all the car companies, Tesla car are the 'most American-made' of any of the USA-based car companies.

      So anyone who is a patriot who says "Buy American!" should skip over their F150 pickup (64% American made) and buy a Tesla (100% American-made).

      Source: http://time.com/4677817/americ...

    21. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Glad to live in a white country!

    22. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by MisterSquid · · Score: 1

      Unless they are white males under the age of 44. They are not protected by federal laws that define hostile work enviornments.....if fact it is our duty to brave the harassment of others with a thick skin.

      This is incorrect. Race is a protected class and discriminating against someone in the workplace because of their race, including members of a racial majority, is illegal under US Federal Law

      Quoting from that link

      Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII)

      This law makes it illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.

      White men under the age of 44 may NOT legally be discriminated against in the workplace for being white, young, or old.

      --
      blog
    23. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by thomst · · Score: 1

      MachineShedFred noted:

      Don't worry - it's no better in urban southern Ohio.

      One of the first things that opened my eyes when I moved here from Portland, is the casual racism (read: incredible ignorance) that some people display.

      Sigh.

      I knew that. I lived in the south, suburban Dayton and U.D. ghetto areas for 9, long, miserable years.

      But it really is worse in Chillicothe, where I live now. I figure that's because it's closer to both the Appalachians and Kentucky ...

      --
      Check out my novel.
    24. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any way you slice it he sounds like a piss poor employee and Tesla should not have hired him. Affirmative action is a travesty.

    25. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's all in the evidence. I worked with a guy who, after he got fired for being super fucking slow and lazy, I heard 3rd hand that he claims he got fired because he was black. And we were all like "he was black?". I guess he was part black, I don't know. Seriously, it didn't even dawn on any of us that a) he might be black or part black, b) there would be any racial undertones around his firing at all. I could see someone like that trying to sue a company for racism just due to his own insecurities. Not saying that's what is happening here, but we'll see what proof the plaintiff has.

    26. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Well, their consumers are more inclined to this side than other car companies, so i would say they're a bigger target for people wanting to profit off this weakness.
      Of course, they could be a bunch of hypocrites, like many actual SJWs.

    27. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On paper, sure. In reality it's open season on white men, because there is demonstrably little repercussions for attacking, insulting, harassing, firing, or raping them.

    28. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Corbets · · Score: 1

      Wow. Youâ(TM)ve been bullied a bit in school, eh? Well, if youâ(TM)re going to have a successful life, youâ(TM)re going to need to develop a thicker skin (and I say that in full awareness of the irony); being bitter and unforgiving will only make your life miserable, no one elsâ(TM)s.

    29. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Nope. Part of being happy and successful is being very clear minded about which people are the problems in your life and eliminating them. People never change. Never forgive. Never forget. Eliminate and move on.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    30. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been to North Carolina several times, and very nearly moved there, and whilst I didn't really get out to rural areas I was treated well by everyone, regardless of colour. In fact the friendliness was a factor in considering living there. However, although I'm white, I'm also British. To be fair, people in the USA have been friendly wherever I've been, just North Carolina even more so.

    31. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Musk may have screwed Tesla by saying that employees should be thick skinned and accept an apology. The law requires that the abuse stops, not that people apologise (however sincerely) for it. Apologising is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for saying anything you like in the workplace, at most it will lessen the severity of the reprimand/punishment.

      His statement really sounds like an admission that Tesla does have a problem and that there are no formal, effective procedures to deal with it.

      I'm surprised you didn't notice that, because you actually wrote "[w]hat you have to do is take whatever steps are necessary to end racial harrassment of the plaintiff in your workplace" so clearly you are aware of what is required.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    32. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      SJW-ism is Church Of No Salvation. A doctrinal revision has converted white guilt into a form of original sin. Ancestral guilt which no amount of penitence can expiate.

      And has been pointed out, why follow a religion which offers no redemption?

      https://web.archive.org/web/20...

      In the latter half of the 20th century, our civic religion was egalitarianism. If you got accused of the sin of racism, you could atone. And as long as he hired a few token women, paid off the Rainbow/PUSH coalition, engaged in ritual recitation of of "I Have a Dream," or voted Democrat, a heterosexual white male could atone for the original sin of his birth.

      The problem is that in the last ten years, the Cathedral has undergone a doctrinal reformation. The old creed, "Race is only skin deep," has been replaced with a new one, "To be white is to be racist." The means of salvation have been taken away, and it is now taught that there is literally no way for a straight, white male to find salvation, to get right with the god of the age, to be restored to respectability.

      Why follow a religion that offers no redemption? Why listen to its priests or care about its rites? The cult of equality is losing its grip on white males, because more and more of us are realizing it offers nothing to us whatsoever. Its condemnations mean nothing now. A church with no salvation is a church with no adherents.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    33. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      You tried to paint a picture of an openly racist black man, by being openly racist yourself. Ironic.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    34. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would anyone want to support the United States? I try to avoid buying American products.

    35. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm so sick of richie-rich fake progressive capitalists lecturing working class people about being "big jerks". I tell you what - I'll stop being a jerk when you stop ruthlessly exploiting me, my family, and my friends.

    36. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be ridiculous - white people can't be racist. We're the ones who are openly, actively, and notoriously discriminated against on the basis of skin color by government and corporations.

    37. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL. Most white people aren't glad about being forced to watch as they are being turned into a minority in their own countries...

      Care to discuss?

      This is just another example of a 'shakedown' - gimmedat - free money for simply being black. Which is why most white people are sick to the back teeth of it.

    38. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      "Having to show up to work on time.
      Having to be productive at work.
      Not being able to blame his poor work performance on "racist crackers""

      On what do you base this? Article mentions nothing of the sort.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    39. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      Racism is a prejudice, it means you pre-judge. That's what you just did. You stereo-typed and pre-judged based upon that stereotype.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    40. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      So you're not proud to be an american based upon something you just made up. WTF?

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    41. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm glad to live in a country where a guy like this can sue the Tesla.

      Wouldn't you be able to do that in almost every country?

    42. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Rei · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sounds like it might be much simpler:

      Regarding yesterday’s lawsuit, several months ago we had already investigated disappointing behavior involving a group of individuals who worked on or near Marcus Vaughn’s team. At the time, our investigation identified a number of conflicting accusations and counter-accusations between several African-American and Hispanic individuals, alleging use of racial language, including the "n-word" and "w-word," towards each other and a threat of violence. After a thorough investigation, immediate action was taken, which included terminating the employment of three of the individuals.

      Aka, according to Tesla, there absolutely was racial language used - but the plaintiff was part of it, and his contract was ended as a consequence. Also, Tesla makes some pretty damning-if-true counterallegations - among them:

      - There is only one actual plaintiff (Marcus Vaughn), not 100. The reference to 100 is a complete fabrication with no basis in fact at all.

      - The plaintiff was employed by a temp agency, not by Tesla as claimed in the lawsuit.

      - Marcus was not fired, he was on a six month temp contract that simply ended as contracted.

      - His email to Elon was about his commute and Tesla’s shuttles, which was addressed as he requested. There was no mention of racial discrimination whatsoever.

      They also allege that the attorney hired has a long track record of taking on meritless lawsuits and using the threat of damage to a company's reputation in the media to get them to settle out of court.

      I would say, "We'll see where this goes", except, well, we all know that while allegations get big headlines, unless there's a surprise ending and a court rules against Tesla, we'll never actually see an article covering the court dismissing the case. Just like each and every other time that something like this has happened.

      --
      The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not âEureka!â(TM), but
    43. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      America can you please get out of the 1970s! Here in the UK this kind of bigoted bullshit just isn't tollerated

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    44. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're also not surrounded by insane levels of crime and violence.

      Go move to Baltimore or Detroit bitch. See how you like your burr headed buddies then.

      You make me fucking sick.

    45. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mste...try being Aussie. The american girls LOVE us !

      Soooo much pussy, it's crazy. It seems the local men are either too fat, or in therapy having crying sessions all the time. Those yankee girls can't ditch them fast enough.

      Having the cool accent helps too.....amiright ? :)

    46. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen this done. Look at what happened to Cult Awareness Network. They were sued to death by the scientology cult: the case that finally bankrupted them was legally filed, and run, by a key scientology lawyer who was then sued by his own client for misrepresenting him. Scientology then bought up the organizations's trademarks, their phone number, their website, and all their mailing lists and documentation about people who'd been seeking help from cults.

      They try to do similar things to psychologists: They *are* the "Citizen's Commission on Human Rights",a propaganda machine designed to make people hate the psychologists and trained medical people who might divert people in need of mental help away from scientology.

    47. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      GOOOO DAYTON FLYERS!

      Now that's out of the way, so yes Southern Ohio/Northern Kentucky/West Virginia is weirdly racist. I grew up in the Dayton area and did a decent amount of work in the southeastern part of the state... So many confederate flags displayed by people who weren't part of the confederacy. I live in Georgia now, and I see far less racism (but more confederate flags) here.

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    48. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not legal to, but trying to actually bring it to court is impossible. This was made entirely clear to me at the age of 19 when I filed a sexual harassment claim with HR when I worked at Best Buy against my 30 something year old boss who claimed to be a lesbian even though the rate she slept with men vs women was something like 3 to 1. She was very open about talking about her sex life at work. I was something like the 5th person over the course of two years to file such a complaint against her. As a white male all I got was indignation and was ostracized for doing it from the entire staff and HR did nothing about it. After all, I'm a white guy and she's a "lesbian", how could she possibly sexually harass me. Impressive seeing as these sorts of matters are supposed to be private, yet every employee there knew I'd done it within 48 hours of my filing the complaint.

    49. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Charcharodon · · Score: 1
      What is ironic is you have two different definitions for racism.

      The first is a person behaving like an asshat based on race. I'm surprised you let that stand since I was applying the basic standard of racism to a black man, which we all "know" can never be a racist.

      The second definition of racism you have, which is the more traditional leftist one, is a white person calling out a black person for being a racist.

    50. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Charcharodon · · Score: 1

      You are not very bright, or at least too impatient to make it all the way to the bottom of my comment. If you had read the whole thing you would have realized I wasn't actually talking about the Tesla employee.

    51. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Charcharodon · · Score: 1
      Your logic is amazing. How do you brush your teeth in the morning without drowning?

      Do you even know to brush your teeth? That could explain how you are still alive.

    52. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      Tell WTF did your little story have to do with the guy the summary is talking about.

      Other than his skin colour?

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    53. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by mjwx · · Score: 1

      What is ironic is you have two different definitions for racism.

      The first is a person behaving like an asshat based on race. I'm surprised you let that stand since I was applying the basic standard of racism to a black man, which we all "know" can never be a racist.

      The second definition of racism you have, which is the more traditional leftist one, is a white person calling out a black person for being a racist.

      Nope, you're the one with two definitions of racism. The one where you get to use negative stereotypes of black people with no consequence and the one where you want consequences for a black man using negative stereotypes about whites. The fact is both are the same form of racism, applying negative generalisation to people based on the colour of their skin. Both are wrong, both are indefensible.

      The final nail in the coffin of your argument is the word leftist. This is an immediate indication that you're not clued in about anything.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    54. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      here is the real truth of bullying
      When you say it affects no one but oneself, you are the jerk.

    55. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      I'm surprised you let that stand since I was applying the basic standard of racism to a black man, which we all "know" can never be a racist.

      You are surprised that your bizarre assumptions about me applying different standards based on skin colour are wrong?

      I mean... How am I supposed to discuss something with you if you just assume all these crazy things and even when you find evidence that your assumptions are wrong just carry on with them anyway?

      Is there literally anything I can say to stop you doing this?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    56. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      alleging use of racial language, including the "n-word" and "w-word," t

      Ok..I know the "n-word" is ni-gger, but what is the "W-word"?

      That's a new one on me. Can't we just start actually using the word rather than euphemisms? Makes communication much more clear and straightforward.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    57. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, only the young are allowed to be discriminated against.

    58. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by wed128 · · Score: 1

      Americans generally like to keep their economy going. Avoiding sending resources *out* of the country is part of that.

    59. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably wetback.

    60. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first two paragraphs make it pretty clear that Musk disapproves of casual expressions of racism. [] The third paragraph presents the plaintiff's attorney's opinion as fact.

      Incorrect. The first two paragraphs present Musk's opinion as opinion. The third paragraph presents the plaintiff's attorney's opinion as opinion. That these are not presented as facts but as opinions is made abundantly clear by the correct use of indirect speech and quotation marks.

    61. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is amazing is that a company soo lauded by self hating white social justice warriors is made by racists.

      On second hand it only seems natural. SJWs can only see the world through color and race. For them black people are disadvantaged minority who must be rescued through the power of social justice.

      Tesla- Made by racists for racists

    62. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Teslas are not 100% American made. Nor is any other car. Parts come from all over the world. For many car parts, only a few suppliers exist and they are rarely American.

    63. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But by buying American products, you are supporting a rogue state that tortures people, props up dictatorships around the world, causes continuous wars in various regions, spies on its closest allies and tries to rig international trade in its favour. I'd rather have my money go somewhere else. Even if the products you buy are made by nice and well-meaning people, as most Americans are, they still have to pay taxes to an evil regime.

    64. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the Age discrimination threshold in the ADEA is those 40 and over, not 44.

      And, yes, I can discriminate legally against those under 40 for being too young.

    65. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by whitroth · · Score: 2

      Really? They did that? When and where? Show me something that didn't come out of your own brainwashed imagination... and nothing from Faux News or Dimbart counts.

      Besides, what good would that do, when they can call employees in, individually or in small groups, and threaten that they'll lose their jobs if they vote a union in. You know, like the Gothamist, and the other paper?

      Or like in the South, where a state legislator threatened an auto plant that if they voted to join a union, he'd pass legislation.

      Don't give me crap that the rich told you to believe.

    66. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on, with a /. # like that, we expect you to understand how threads work. OC'S comment was clearly in reference to GOC's, "stuff he wouldn't put past them". OC wasn't making a statement of fact.

    67. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      Per my link above, Anonymous Coward, the stats are where the vehicles are assembled. So in the case of a Ford F150, the chassis might be assembled in Mexico then shipped to the USA. Or the Engine might be assembled in Canada.

      Obviously the parts come from somewhere else, but the value is based on vehicle assembly.

    68. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      but sincerely apologizes

      Emphasis mine. Postel's law, anyone?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    69. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Radiophobic · · Score: 1

      Funny, I noticed that they have a tendency to buy whichever affordable luxury item is the cheapest, which usually means everything they buy has been manufactured in China. The 'buy American' phase ended in the 80s.

    70. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Or, you know, you could talk to the person and tell them to stop talking like that. Fuck people who could avoid a lot of situations with directly talking to the person and letting them know your problem. Unless the person is apk, and doesn't understand how to fucking stop annoying people no matter how much you plead.

    71. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      On the one hand, people make all sorts of claims about SJWs, and on the other those people accuse lots of people of being SJWs that don't match the claims. The net result is libel.

      The "all whites are racist" stuff belongs to the lunatic fringe. "All whites are privileged" is what you're actually looking at, and that';s pretty much true.

      And then you go and quote some drivel archived from therightstuff.biz.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    72. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, people 45-65 were a protected class, but people under 45 or over 65 could be discriminated against by reason of age. Personally, I think the high number should track the Social Security full retirement age, but right now it doesn't.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    73. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      A sincere apology includes an attempt to do better in the future. If someone is a jerk to you, apologizes, and then continues being a jerk, that's conclusive evidence that the apology was insincere. Avoid that person if at all possible. If you're in a relationship, dump the jerk.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    74. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by thomst · · Score: 1

      AmiMoJo observed:

      Musk may have screwed Tesla by saying that employees should be thick skinned and accept an apology. The law requires that the abuse stops, not that people apologise (however sincerely) for it. Apologising is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for saying anything you like in the workplace, at most it will lessen the severity of the reprimand/punishment.

      His statement really sounds like an admission that Tesla does have a problem and that there are no formal, effective procedures to deal with it.

      I'm surprised you didn't notice that, because you actually wrote "[w]hat you have to do is take whatever steps are necessary to end racial harrassment of the plaintiff in your workplace" so clearly you are aware of what is required.

      Here's Tesla's official response to yesterday's announcement of the lawsuit:

      Hotbed of Misinformation
      The Tesla Team November 14, 2017

      Tesla is absolutely against any form of discrimination, harassment, or unfair treatment of any kind. When we hear complaints, we take them very seriously, investigate thoroughly and, if proven to be true, take immediate action.

      Everyone at Tesla, without exception, is required to go through an anti-discrimination course. Our human resources team also conducts regular in-person spot training sessions when an allegation or complaint has been made, even if the evidence is not conclusive enough to warrant disciplinary action. We have also created a dedicated team focused exclusively on investigating workplace concerns, recommending corrective actions and assisting managers with implementing those actions.

      Regarding yesterday’s lawsuit, several months ago we had already investigated disappointing behavior involving a group of individuals who worked on or near Marcus Vaughn’s team. At the time, our investigation identified a number of conflicting accusations and counter-accusations between several African-American and Hispanic individuals, alleging use of racial language, including the "n-word" and "w-word," towards each other and a threat of violence. After a thorough investigation, immediate action was taken, which included terminating the employment of three of the individuals.

      We believe this was the fair and just response to the facts that we learned. There will be further action as necessary, including parting ways with anyone whose behavior prevents Tesla from being a great place to work and making sure we do everything possible to stop bad behavior from happening in the first place. Our company has more than 33,000 employees, with over 10,000 in the Fremont factory alone, so it is not humanly possible to stop all bad conduct, but we will do our best to make it is as close to zero as possible.

      There are a number of other false statements in the class action lawsuit alleging a so-called “hotbed of discrimination”:

      - There is only one actual plaintiff (Marcus Vaughn), not 100. The reference to 100 is a complete fabrication with no basis in fact at all.

      - The plaintiff was employed by a temp agency, not by Tesla as claimed in the lawsuit.

      - Marcus was not fired, he was on a six month temp contract that simply ended as contracted.

      - His email to Elon was about his commute and Tesla’s shuttles, which was addressed as he requested. There was no mention of racial discrimination whatsoever.

      - The trial lawyer who filed this lawsuit has a long track record of extorting money for meritless claims and using the threat of media attacks and expensive trial costs to get companies to settle. At Tesla, we would rather pay ten times the settlement demand in legal fees and fight to the ends of the Earth than give in to extortion and allow this abuse of the legal system.

      - We would also like to clear up the description of Elon’s prior email to employees. It is dedicated to ensuring that Tesla employees always try to do the r

      --
      Check out my novel.
    75. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Z80a · · Score: 2

      A bunch of unprivileged whites did put Trump in power, and if you keep ignoring em, they will do it again.

    76. Re: Racism sucks... fight back by Bartles · · Score: 1

      You mean, must be rescued by enlightened white people. Think about it that way and it makes even more sense.

    77. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      The "all whites are racist" stuff belongs to the lunatic fringe. "All whites are privileged" is what you're actually looking at, and that';s pretty much true.

      The NYT run this horrible article a couple of days ago, though of course they'd be outraged if anyone run an article by a white person questioning whether his children could be friends with black people

      Can My Children Be Friends With White People?

      The irony is of course that the sort of people who write for the NYT are privileged. Not because of their race but because of their wealth and the fact that people like them have a monopoly of access to the media. Their sort of views are all over the place, and the views of people critical of them are completely purged out both old media - the NYT and the TV networks and new media - the Internet.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    78. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      "Did they have an easy life?" is not an appropriate question to determine privilege. "Would they have had a harder life if they were black?" is an appropriate question.

      I'm aware that there are a lot of people out there of all skin colors who are having serious problems with life, and that there are many who will vote against their self-interest for a pocketful of sweet lies.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    79. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      "The first two paragraphs make it pretty clear that Musk disapproves of casual expressions of racism."

      If you know anything about Elon's history and that of the country where he grew up, you know _WHY_ he "disapproves".

      Oh and it's not just disapproval. Elon's got a long history of actively opposing racism.

    80. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by whyyisthissohard · · Score: 1

      You're a brainless kneejerking animal.

      You haven't asked any critical questions about this case at all.

    81. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by thomst · · Score: 1

      I pointed out:

      "The first two paragraphs make it pretty clear that Musk disapproves of casual expressions of racism."

      Prompting stoatwblr to say:

      If you know anything about Elon's history and that of the country where he grew up, you know _WHY_ he "disapproves".

      Oh and it's not just disapproval. Elon's got a long history of actively opposing racism.

      I don't actually know anything about Elon's history before he left Paypal. I do, however, know he's South African, so it doesn't surprise me to hear he has a record of actively opposing racism. White South Africans fall pretty neatly into two camps on that score - and I can't imagine a person of Elon's intelligence being pro-apartheid ...

      --
      Check out my novel.
    82. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Charcharodon · · Score: 1
      Nothing, my little story was about other people if you had bothered to read the whole thing.

      You were the one using stereotypes and prejudging.......what did you call that? Racism?

      I wouldn't call you a racist but you do seem very stupid.

    83. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Having a 5% advantage on complete poverty is still complete poverty.

    84. Re:Racism sucks... fight back by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Since they're hispanic, my guess would be wetback.

  2. Uh huh by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So was an Air Force Academy recently until it was found out that the very same person who was pitching a fit about " racism " was also the same person who wrote the slur on the wall to begin with.

    1. Re:Uh huh by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Great, well that settles a lot. All racist episodes are self-inflicted. Now let's go worry about something else.

      [/sarcasm]

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    2. Re:Uh huh by Rockoon · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Telsa is the biggest prize the UAW has seen in awhile, and so the UAW is using every trick possible. War on all fronts.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Maybe we should acknowledge that since one was, at least there is the possibility that others are as well and require a little more evidence, next time, than a #MeToo tag.

      But that would require learning from past mistakes and that isn't something the rabid left does.

    4. Re:Uh huh by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The point that just sailed over your head is that we shouldn't take such a claim as true without corroborating evidence.

      You may return to your regular virtue-signaling posturing now.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    5. Re:Uh huh by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Great, well that settles a lot. All racist episodes are self-inflicted. Now let's go worry about something else.

      No, however it's worth taking into consideration that people will do this kind of thing (probably more frequently than we know) to extract money from the rich/corporations.

      It's better than crying "ABUSE" right off the bat. It's also better than "Now let's go worry about something else."

      One should be mindful when confronted with situations like these. (Or any, for that matter.)

      --
      I tend to rant.
    6. Re:Uh huh by quantaman · · Score: 2

      So was an Air Force Academy recently until it was found out that the very same person who was pitching a fit about " racism " was also the same person who wrote the slur on the wall to begin with.

      Possibly, but if it were a fake complaint your evidence would be something that's hard to corroborate like a private conversation or a racist slur written somewhere.

      But this guy alleges employees and supervisors regularly used the "N word" around him and other black colleagues. In other words he's stating there's a bunch of witnesses to multiple incidents, witnesses that can easily back up or refute his story.

      If you were going to invent a claim out of mid air you wouldn't assert a bunch of non-existent witnesses.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    7. Re:Uh huh by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1
      The lawsuit purports to have an email from Elon Musk, himself, that is pretty damning.

      According to Monday’s complaint, Musk sent an email to Tesla factory employees on May 31. “Part of not being a huge jerk is considering how someone might feel who is part of [a] historically less represented group,” Musk wrote in the email. “Sometimes these things happen unintentionally, in which case you should apologize. In fairness, if someone is a jerk to you, but sincerely apologizes, it is important to be thick-skinned and accept that apology.”

      Anything less than a zero tolerance policy from the the CEO is grounds for a lawsuit. The fact that the employee making the complaint was subsequently fired is the final straw.

    8. Re:Uh huh by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      Kindly provide proof that the UAW is behind this.

      Because sure enough, the worker who is charging Tesla with harassment will need to provide his own.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    9. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By analogy. There was a case where someone was falsely accused of murder.

      Therefore, we are justified in dismissing as false, any claim of murder made by anyone, anytime.

      Nice. I thought people were supposed to be smarter on this site.

    10. Re:Uh huh by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Witnesses he is trying to include in the settlement money payout. That doesn't make for an unbiased statement.

      seeking permission from a judge to sue on behalf of the group

      All members of the group stand to gain financially.

    11. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oddly enough, being falsely accused of murder (but cleared) has less impact in your future life than being falsely accused of being a racist or sexist.

    12. Re:Uh huh by GrumpySteen · · Score: 2

      How do you think a lawsuit over racism will cause the employees who are being accused of racism to vote to join the UAW?

      Please answer. I'm fairly sure the mental gymnastics required for that leap in logic will be almost as entertaining as the dearly departed Time Cube guy.

    13. Re:Uh huh by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      That doesn't appear to be a very damning email.

      Next thing you'll be saying is "anything less that execution of the highest management of the company is unacceptable!"

    14. Re: Uh huh by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      You must live in a sad place where what you're writing is true.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    15. Re:Uh huh by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Women have also been documented to have made up cases of abuse, rape, or threatening incidents. It doesn't mean that these incidents don't happen for real in plenty of other cases. All it means is that some people lie, especially when its in a situation to benefit them or punish those they have a grudge against.

      Let's see if there is any merit to the claims before rushing to judgement one way or another. If this truly is a systemic problem, it seems like there should be plenty of corroborating evidence and testimony to be had, according to the account described by the plaintiff.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    16. Re:Uh huh by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Of course, because UAW wants to unionize Tesla therefore all complaints about anything should be automatically discarded and no investigation of any kind should be undertaken.

      That makes perfect sense. /sarcasm.

    17. Re:Uh huh by swb · · Score: 1

      So if the exchange went like this...

      Listen, I'm sorry I called you a lazy nig*er. That wasn't right, I should have called you a motivationally challenged African American. Sorry. Now get over it.

    18. Re:Uh huh by sycodon · · Score: 2

      I think every one of the recently and widely publicized racist episodes were indeed fake.

      Banana Peel, "noose" made of a show lace, West Point.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    19. Re:Uh huh by sycodon · · Score: 1

      At West Point, the Perp confessed. No, he was not a person of pallor.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    20. Re:Uh huh by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It won't, because it's not aimed at the workers. If the UAW is behind it, the goal would be a show of force. As in, "don't fight the unionization effort or bad things will happen for your PR." Top-down SJW directives make accusations of racism more of a kiss of death for individual managers and executives because they can't be sure the company will have their backs. Thus, it's leverage against the footsoldiers of the opposing side.

      Conspiracy theory? Oh yeah. Plausible? Sure.

    21. Re: Uh huh by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      I live a place where racial discrimination in the workplace is illegal and where CEOs are expected to at least make token effort to comply with the law.

    22. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so the UAW is using every trick possible.

      Err... the trick of accusing a bunch of employees of racism?

      I'm not sure you've thought that one through.

    23. Re:Uh huh by quantaman · · Score: 1

      Witnesses he is trying to include in the settlement money payout. That doesn't make for an unbiased statement.

      seeking permission from a judge to sue on behalf of the group

      All members of the group stand to gain financially.

      So you're alleging a conspiracy now? All the black folks are going to say one thing and all the white folks another?

      I suppose it's possible... though really unlikely.

      There are three plausible scenarios here:
      1) The complainant is completely accurate and Tesla has an outspoken group of racist employees in its factory that it has failed to deal with.
      2) The complainant is partially accurate, but the problem isn't as widespread as they imply.
      3) The complainant is completely making it up (and will quickly be found out because it's a dumb complaint to fabricate).

      I think it's very likely #1 or #2 with a small chance for #3 because a single individual can sometimes make a really dumb decision.

      Claiming a conspiracy just doesn't make sense.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    24. Re: Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a "sad place" to have a zero tolerance policy towards racism.

      If your CEO is telling people to grow a "thick skin" that is not a good sign for Tesla in the upcoming lawsuit. These kind of cultures are tacitly permitted by upper management and saying something like that in an email is not going to look good in the courtroom.

    25. Re:Uh huh by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just check their post history, they think everything is a conspiracy created by Communists/trade unions/leftists. They don't need evidence, commies are everywhere, they infiltrated everything!

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    26. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't sound like a sincere apology to me, so not covered by that memo.

    27. Re:Uh huh by sexconker · · Score: 1

      So you're alleging a conspiracy now? All the black folks are going to say one thing and all the white folks another?

      I suppose it's possible... though really unlikely.

      It doesn't need to be all. Just some.

      If he's seeking to add 100+ people to the class, they only need to find a handful willing to testify that they experienced such treatment to have a good chance of convincing Tesla to fork out cash.

      The defense could literally parade every other member of the class through court. The prosecution would have 2 questions for such witnesses: Did you experience this yourself? (No.) Can you say for sure that others did not experience it? (No.)

      The prosecution only has to show that it happened to one class member if granted class status (since the claim is that the entire class is victimized by the behavior even if it wasn't direct/overt for all members). The defense has to show that it didn't happen to any.

      If you don't think you can get a handful of people in a group of 100+ to lie for personal gain, regardless of the makeup of that group, you're a fool.

    28. Re:Uh huh by DRJlaw · · Score: 2

      The point that just sailed over your head is that we shouldn't take such a claim as true without corroborating evidence.

      No, the point is a court can't take such as claim as true without corroborating evidence. "We" can take such a claim any way we like, since any presumption that Tesla does not maintain a hostile work environment also lacks corroborating evidence. Once may be an anomaly, twice may be a conspiracy, but thrice or more suggests a real problem.

    29. Re:Uh huh by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Anything less than a zero tolerance policy from the the CEO is grounds for a lawsuit.

      Only because you can sue for anything, and nothing.
      You can have whatever policy (or no policy). That wouldn't be grounds for a successful lawsuit

    30. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It should be changed to read, "His other black co-workers and black supervisors regularly used the N word around him."

    31. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And "We" think it's bullshit, the person making the claims is a liar looking for personal gain along with anyone that supports them.

      No evidence required per your example.

    32. Re:Uh huh by viperidaenz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      or 2.5) The complainant is partially accurate and the problem wasn't as widespread as they implied, and Tesla has already dealt with it but the complainant wants money.

      see sexconker's reply for an answer to you thinking I'm implying an alleged conspiracy.

    33. Re:Uh huh by fodder69 · · Score: 2

      Sigh, as soon as anyone feels the need to throw SJW or MRA in an argument, they instantly lose credibility to me. Doesn't matter what you are arguing cause you are, by definition, employing ad hominem attacks

    34. Re: Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he won't, because the war the parent is referring to is fought in the Court of Public Opinion.

      Also, it's interesting that on slashdot you can't say n..i....gg..er even in a purely academic cintext. But it's fine to say Slope, Nip, Jerry, Chink, Slant, Charlie, Cracker, Honkey, and basically any other slur against a White or an Asian. Which happen to be the two racial groups that blacks are heavily prejudiced against.
      And it's ok to say Nigguh, nigga, nyucka, or any other variant of "the N word" which is commonly used among blacks.

    35. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      extortion (ek-stor-shen)
      n.
      1. Illegal use of one's official position or powers to obtain property, funds, or patronage.
      2. The act or an instance of extorting something, as by psychological pressure.
      3. An excessive or exorbitant charge.

      "Hey, management: stop opposing unionization and we make the bad headlines and lawsuits magically go away"

      Wow, that was a hard one. Not saying that's what is happening here, but it's not exactly a mind bender to put that one together. And it's not like some in the UAW haven't resulted to extortion in the past. And doesn't this all sound eerily familiar to what the UAW says about Nissan after getting their ass kicked in a vote to unionize a plant in Mississippi? Yeah, yeah; "Perhaps recognizing they couldn’t keep their workers from joining our union based on the facts, Nissan and its anti-worker allies ran a vicious campaign against its own work force that was comprised of intense scare tactics, misinformation and intimidation." Who talks like that? Do you think they have a boiler plate press release with these quotes on them that they just change the company name on?

      Funny how the UAW goes whining to the NLRB with complaints, and whines to the press about how terrible the workers are getting it, yet they keep getting bounced out on their asses BY THE WORKERS even after forcing a vote. The result is that the UAW conducts a "corporate campaign" to shame the employers and hopefully sway some minds towards a 'yes' vote in the process. It's shameful shit, and they've been doing it for years.

      But yeah, a lawsuit over racism probably doesn't have anything to do with a campaign like that...

    36. Re:Uh huh by jcr · · Score: 1

      If you want to pass over employment opportunities based on rumor, that's your own problem.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    37. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correction, they are accusing the management of being racist, because they (allegedly) didn't do anything about the (alleged) casual racism. That is tantamount to calling the company itself racist.

      This is a political maneuver. And if you don't see it, you're not looking nearly hard enough.

    38. Re: Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Until we see some actual evidence then the presumption of guilt you display is more than enough to show that the parent, while being obviously off his medication, is probably closer to the truth than you are.
      Especially considering your own sordid posting history, which amounts to conspiracy theories in the opposite direction liberally adorned with ad hominem attacks, false dichotomies, and other logical fallacies.

    39. Re:Uh huh by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except that this is the official language that even HR uses in the employee handbook at Tesla, as documented many places you can find on Google. And, on the first day you are told that if you see a problem, you talk to whoever is best equipped to fix it fast - and that includes sending an email to Elon Musk if that's what it takes.

      If there's casual racism being thrown about, and the immediate supervisor of the racists is unwilling to do jack shit about it, why didn't this guy take up that invitation and send a communication to an executive or five and get them shitcanned?

      Doesn't seem legit on the face of things.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    40. Re: Uh huh by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Would you rather have a CEO writing his honest opinion in an email, or some HR-sanitized boiler plate that is immediately ignored by all (including HR) and deleted from the inbox ?

      This sounds like Musk heard there may have been some issues with employee conduct, and he pulled out his phone and tapped out an email right then and there.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    41. Re: Uh huh by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

      You missed the point.

      Just because someone claims they are a victim of something, doesn't mean it's always true.

      In this day and age, I'm skeptical of any such claims until I see evidence to prove otherwise.

    42. Re: Uh huh by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      You missed the point.

      Just because someone claims they are a victim of something, doesn't mean it's always true.

      In this day and age, I'm skeptical of any such claims until I see evidence to prove otherwise.

      The jump by the OP to dismiss it as made-up is my point. It's part of an apologist strategy to defuse any claim of racism whenever it surfaces.

      And being skeptical is good. But being dismissive is not.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    43. Re:Uh huh by ClickOnThis · · Score: 2

      The point that just sailed over your head is that we shouldn't take such a claim as true without corroborating evidence.

      My point was that the immediate dismissing of a claim of racism as made-up is an apologist strategy to defuse any claim of racism whenever it surfaces.

      Anybody who claims anything might be guilty of making it up. That doesn't mean we should ignore people who speak up about their experiences. Current events (not just this one) surrounding Tesla have indicated that there might be some racist elements in their organization. That warrants some attention.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    44. Re:Uh huh by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 0

      SJW is at this point a descriptive shorthand as much as it is an insult. Accusing the management of not having employee's back because of race-tainted PR means exactly the same thing, is just as insulting (that's the intent), but takes way too many words.

    45. Re: Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Communists have nothing to do with this race baiting crap, you running dog of capital.

    46. Re: Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fake progressives sure do hate tolerance.

    47. Re:Uh huh by MrL0G1C · · Score: 2

      The point you've missed is that the original poster is blatantly trying to create a racist stereotype. The replier recognised that.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    48. Re:Uh huh by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      This is racist stereotyping, clearly some Slashdotters don't understand the difference between incite and insight.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    49. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially when someone else is funding the lawsuit, or paying the plaintiff's bills while the lawsuit proceeds against someone the funder wants to discredit. Look into the history of Microsoft funding SCO to make frivolous lawsuits against Linux users. Wikipedia mentions it at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... . It was covered in more detail at the time, at the wonderful legal analysis site www.groklaw.net.

    50. Re:Uh huh by mjwx · · Score: 2, Informative

      SJW is at this point a descriptive shorthand as much as it is an insult.

      So it's meaningless, SJW isn't an insult, except to the person who's using it.

      SJW has just become a way of telling us we've said something that has butthurt you and you cant form a rational rebuttal to it. Much the same as "PC", "Leftist", "hater" and other meaningless insults thrown about when you cant argue the point.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    51. Re:Uh huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything less than a zero tolerance policy from the the CEO is grounds for a lawsuit

      It's funny how some people are all about tolerance. Until they're not.

    52. Re:Uh huh by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      "Hater" is pretty meaningless but "PC," "Leftist," and "SJW" connote a very clear set of behaviors and beliefs. You may not think there's anything there to condemn, but maybe that's because you're a PC leftist SJW who sees haters everywhere.

    53. Re:Uh huh by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      And "We" think it's bullshit, the person making the claims is a liar looking for personal gain along with anyone that supports them.

      No evidence required per your example.

      No need to credit my example, there are almost countless AC posts before mine that say virtually the same thing. No evidence required per your examples.

    54. Re: Uh huh by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      I live a place where racial discrimination in the workplace is illegal

      So do I.

      and where CEOs are expected to at least make token effort to comply with the law.

      So do ours.

      Anything less than a zero tolerance policy from the the CEO is grounds for a lawsuit.

      But the last thing is questionable and hardly follows from the first two statements.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    55. Re: Uh huh by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      It's not a "sad place" to have a zero tolerance policy towards racism.

      If it's the same zero tolerance that gets your schoolkids suspended or expelled for idiotic reasons, then it is. I don't know how many different zero tolerances you happen to have over there, so maybe it's some different zero tolerance I'm not familiar with.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    56. Re:Uh huh by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Speaking as something of a leftist, I don't consider it an insult. I consider people who use it (or "liberal") as insults to be largely inarticulate and not capable of serious coherent thought.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    57. Re:Uh huh by Magius_AR · · Score: 1

      Sigh, as soon as anyone feels the need to throw SJW or MRA in an argument, they instantly lose credibility to me. Doesn't matter what you are arguing cause you are, by definition, employing ad hominem attacks

      Hrm, oddly enough, I feel very similar about hasty generalizations about large groups of people based on small samples of anecdotal evidence.

  3. So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't like it.......don't work there! In other words.......
     
    I am sick and tired of all these drama queens making up stories about how they are "offended" all the time. We have an Internet and sensationalist media which WILL bring a corporation to its knees if there is any REAL amount of racism going on there.

    1. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't like it.......don't work there!

      You're not the only one who is tired of outrage culture and, while we should remember that the workplace is not a democracy and that you're not there to be comfy, there should be certain restrictions on policies and working conditions. We don't have and we don't want to have a society where the employee is 100% at the mercy of the employer as soon as they walk in the door.

      If someone can *document* behavior that violates a law, I see no reason why Tesla shouldn't be punished for it. Whether that is the case remains to be seen.

  4. What's the connection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the allegations are true they would be simple to confirm, since the plaintiff claims to have contacted HR and Musk. My experience with HR groups is they don't sit on such complaints as they would have in the past. So I am doubting this story - time will tell.

    But anyway - what I want to know is if this individual was involved in trying to unionize the workforce. Unions are notorious for these kinds of lawsuits when they don't get their way. You don't play ball, they withhold support for projects and file lawsuits. The lawsuit itself is nonsense but tactical in trying to force an owner to their knees to service the unions.

    1. Re: What's the connection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The email from Musk confirms that he knew about the complaints and made no changes to address them. QED

  5. To be fair.... by mark-t · · Score: 0

    Society itself is a "hotbed for racist behavior".

    It sucks that so many people can't see past the superfluous differences of what country a person happens to be from or what color their skin happens to be, and treat every single person with no less respect than what anyone would desire to be treated themselves, but going after a company like Telsa for this is not going accomplish a darn thing other than at most, cost Tesla some money that won't have the slightest impact on society at large beyond possibly making their cars even more expensive.

    Hell, even the laws of thermodynamics suggest not only that life's not fair, but that you also can't get even either.

    1. Re:To be fair.... by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Society itself is a "hotbed for racist behavior".

      Bullshit. Racism is not tolerated in polite society, and nearly all of the racists you can still find are either the handful of nazi wannabes or they're tenured leftards in taxpayer-dependent institutions.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    2. Re:To be fair.... by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Racism is not tolerated in polite society, and nearly all of the racists you can still find are either the handful of nazi wannabes or they're tenured leftards in taxpayer-dependent institutions.

      Oh? You would be surprised.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    3. Re:To be fair.... by markdavis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >"Society itself is a "hotbed for racist behavior".

      Um, not at all, at least not in the USA. That is a horribly inaccurate generalization. Racism is real, for sure. But it is nowhere near as prevalent as many would assume, and saying otherwise is really just irresponsible. And much of what people label as "racism" isn't at all, it is dislike of observed BEHAVIOR.

      And in the case of Tesla, we have yet to see any real proof of racism. There is a HUGE force (the union) trying to create problems that might not even exist. We need to keep an open mind and not jump to conclusions.

    4. Re:To be fair.... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wouldn't be surprised at all. Seriously, some of the most racist people I know are well intentioned liberal retards who think they are helping black people. Because obviously, black people don't know about cell phones or even where the DMV is.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:To be fair.... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

      We need to keep an open mind and not jump to conclusions.

      You must be new here - welcome to Slashdot!

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    6. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. Racism is not tolerated in polite society, and nearly all of the racists you can still find are either the handful of nazi wannabes or they're tenured leftards in taxpayer-dependent institutions.

      You're aiming for the +5 ironic post modification, aren't you?

    7. Re:To be fair.... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Racism is not tolerated in polite society, and nearly all of the racists you can still find are either the handful of nazi wannabes or they're tenured leftards in taxpayer-dependent institutions.

      Oh? You would be surprised.

      ... if you actually contributed to the conversation? Why yes, yes I would.

      Cite a source or STFU. The world needs less namby-pamby "what abouters," not more.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    8. Re:To be fair.... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly well convinced that 99.9% of the people who claim the US is some racist hellhole have never experienced anything even resembling discrimination, let alone racism, in their lives.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    9. Re:To be fair.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      But it is nowhere near as prevalent as many would assume, and saying otherwise is really just irresponsible

      Only if one is not prepared to be responsible for how they themselves act towards others, or to pass the blame for any lack of decent standards on the society in which they live instead of holding themselves accountable for their own choices and practices, and striving to live above a standard that may be deemed as unfair and unjust, even while society itself might continue to remain so.

    10. Re:To be fair.... by VocationalZero · · Score: 1

      Hell, even the laws of thermodynamics suggest not only that life's not fair, but that you also can't get even either.

      Using the laws of Physics as a vehicle for a political world-view? Now you are just trolling.

    11. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the racists I know make less than double the poverty level and want Trump to make america great again. And I am inclined to say that at least half (but not the same half) aren't white.

    12. Re:To be fair.... by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      What is there to cite? You just have to walk outside and listen to people talk.

      My contribution was clearly to raise our friend's awareness that racism is not just about the loud-mouthed racial slurring nazis. Our friend Michael did an excellent job hammering the point further.

      Why so angry?

      --
      I tend to rant.
    13. Re:To be fair.... by fafalone · · Score: 2

      That's simply not true in the vast majority of the country. It's just hidden. Or did you miss when being clearly racist doesn't even disqualify someone from being president?

    14. Re:To be fair.... by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "Racism is not tolerated in polite society"

      Historically and even today, that is not correct. I have heard all kinds of things from 'polite society' as a waiter when I was a teenager, and let me tell you, if ya weren't white, you were fair game.

      Guarantee you it's still happening now.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    15. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a convincing argument.

    16. Re:To be fair.... by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

      SCVonSteroids is absolutely correct. Racism is everywhere. Just look how white people are treated in this country by minorities.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    17. Re:To be fair.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Using the laws of Physics as a vehicle for a political world-view? Now you are just trolling.

      Maybe just a little, yeah... but that doesn't mean it isn't true.

    18. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, perhaps we did miss it. What was it Obama did that was racist?

    19. Re: To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You still trying to blame Democrats and liberals because lawsuits in Wisconsin, Alabama, North Carolina, Texas, and Pennsylvania resulted in courts finding the conservative Republican governments in each of those states committed willful and deliberate racial discrimination in order to deter blacks from voting?

      Oh well, I guess you can blame Obama.

      After all, nobody could imagine the DMV being a hotbed of obstructive bureaucracy.

    20. Re:To be fair.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I was not alleging anything about the USA in particular... other so-called progressive countries are often not any better.

    21. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Overt racism is not tolerated in polite society

      FTFY.

    22. Re:To be fair.... by quantaman · · Score: 2

      I wouldn't be surprised at all. Seriously, some of the most racist people I know are well intentioned liberal retards who think they are helping black people. Because obviously, black people don't know about cell phones or even where the DMV is.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      I suppose you can hear that if you really want to... but there's some major slight of hand going on in that video.

      Here's the actual facts:
      1) Voter IDs laws are designed to disenfranchise black people because black people overwhelmingly vote Democrat.
      2) This works because the process required to get a government ID is fairly complicated, and the things that make it complicated tend to correlate with being black, hispanic, poor, or elderly. 3 of those 4 groups that lean Democratic.
      3) States looking to disenfranchise minorities tend to treat their black population worse in general. If they're trying to disenfranchise them with voter ID laws they'll try extra hard to avoid giving them IDs.

      Now here's the first trick the Fox News reporter pulls:

      1) He seeks out a bunch of white undergrads who understand that voter ID laws seek to disenfranchise minorities but they don't fully understand the mechanisms that make it difficult for minorities to obtain IDs for voting.
      2) Next he primes them with answers, for instance one problem with getting ID over the Internet is you may not have the proper documentation. Other than the first guy who talks about access the reporter seems to prime them by talking about access, so predictably they run with the idea that some of the disenfranchised black people have trouble accessing the internet.

      Now, here comes the second trick:

      1) The white undergrads were talking about black people in states targeted by voter ID laws. New York is not one of those states. So many of the fundamental issues like access to ID aren't applicable. Basically he's "debunking" the assertions by talking to a completely different group of people.
      2) Now this one is very subtle but very disingenuous. The white interviewees are talking about the specific subset of black people who are being targeted by the voter ID laws, ie people having trouble obtaining ID. Now the reporter repeats those statements back to individual black people as though they were meant to describe them, the reporter is the one who generalizes the statements and makes them racist.

      And of course you have the fact that he's almost certainly cherry picking a very non-representative sample of interviewees. You should be very skeptical of accepting a heavily edited video as evidence from someone known for deceptively and unethically editing their videos.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    23. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm fairly well convinced that 99.9% of the people who claim that racial discrimination isn't HUGELY prevalent in the US are white people who have never had an honest discussion on the subject with anyone who ISN'T white. For people with a natural tan, being discriminated against because of the color of their skin is a daily occurrence. It doesn't always take the form of a coworker calling you the N word on a daily basis. Sometimes it is being followed in a store, or people locking their car door when you walk past on the sidewalk minding your own business, or a clerk that is polite to everyone else in line, then suddenly rude to you, and so on.

      Please consider that when people complain about pervasive racism, they might be telling the truth.

    24. Re:To be fair.... by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Racism is not tolerated in polite society, and nearly all of the racists you can still find are either the handful of nazi wannabes or they're tenured leftards in taxpayer-dependent institutions.

      At a professional distance, yes. Who you hang out with or who your son/daughter is dating... eh. Not everyone is so open-minded as they pretend to be.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    25. Re:To be fair.... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Racism is not tolerated in polite society

      It's not? Tell that to Democrats, Republicans, and media pundits who DGAF about murdering Arabs with drones and other weaponry, and in some cases cheer for it.

    26. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should be very skeptical of accepting a heavily edited video as evidence from someone known for deceptively and unethically editing their videos.

      Archangel Michael being skeptical of somebody saying what he wants to hear?

      INCONCEIVABLE!

      Remember, he takes all his cues from Trump, and if Trump blindly trusts Putin, so must the rest of us.

    27. Re:To be fair.... by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      Forget the politics associated with it. Explain to me why someone in the United States who has no identification should be allowed to have any choice of leadership? Who are all of these people without ID? How do they contribute or interact with anything in society? ID is a pretty basic requirement for doing anything in the modern world, I don't think it's asking too much for people requesting the power to pick the President of the United States prove who they are.

      Meanwhile, for all the other things in life that require ID: driving, getting a bank account, buying alcohol and cigarettes, buying glue, buying cold medicine (but oddly, not prescription medication), flying, etc... Are we racist for requiring ID?

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    28. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMHO it all boils down to tribalism. We don't like those who are different. Racism, nationalism, partisan BS, homophobia, it's all symptoms of the same thing. And beyond that, from what I've seen is the people who rail the hardest against something probably indulge in it the most. Sexism is the only ism that I don't think is a symptom of tribalism.

    29. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are using Fox News as a source? Wow, you really are on the crazy side of the fence.

    30. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but boy they sure can show up and buy alcohol (provide id), cough medicine (provide id), open bank accounts (provide ID).

      Your argument has no merit.

    31. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh dear. Such a horrible world to live in. A store clerk was rude or was following me! People locked their car doors. The travesty. Such a racist hellhole!

      Meanwhile, in the real world. People are dying for being the wrong color. People lose their property for being the wrong color. People have fewer rights for being the wrong color.

      Forgive me if the examples you give of "racist hellhole" are overstated to say the very least compared to actual racism.

    32. Re:To be fair.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK. So pick a random street corner where you live that has a diverse group of 10 or more people waiting for the crosswalk light and utter an epithet of your choice. We'll wait.

      No? Seems jcr was right then.

    33. Re:To be fair.... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 0

      Everything you say would be true, except that it is itself propaganda. Nobody actually asks those questions.

      Here are some key assumptions and racist thoughts you expose in your own assessment.

      2) This works because the process required to get a government ID is fairly complicated

      This is pure racist bullshit. You are basically saying that it is so complicated only WHITE people can figure it out. That it is so complicated that Minorities can't figure it out. Queue up "Black people don't know where DMV is" level complicated.

      And of course you have the fact that he's almost certainly cherry picking a very non-representative sample of interviewees.

      Again, that is YOUR assumption. However based on your own response, you committed the very same infractions, you just dressed it up in progressive code language.

      Here is the Progressive Trick, they use code language to call blacks and minorities "stupid" by labeling them all the same based on some hypothetical disenfranchised anecdotal reference. The fact is, they can't or won't even try to produce anyone that fits that particular narrative. It is a neat trick though, because now you can label anyone that wants voter ID laws (like Mexico, India, and a whole slew of 3rd world countries have) as "racist". You don't have to prove it. All because you seem to think that color of skin makes people too dumb to figure out the "complicated" things that only "white people" seem to figure out.

      Further, this line of reasoning you've walk yourself down, clearly indicates that those people truly affected by not being able to navigate because of the color of their skin need remedial help (again because they are stupid) and aren't being educated well enough (public funded schools) to be able to fully participate in our society. If such people actually exist, why aren't progressives out in droves helping them navigate the "complicated" process of getting an ID?

      I'm sorry if I don't want to buy the pure racist bullshit you're selling.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    34. Re:To be fair.... by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      Society itself is a "hotbed for racist behavior".

      Bullshit. Racism is not tolerated in polite society, and nearly all of the racists you can still find are either the handful of nazi wannabes or they're tenured leftards in taxpayer-dependent institutions.

      -jcr

      Sure, blatant open racism isn't tolerated. White people don't go around calling black people the N word. However, skin color is part of how people perceive one another. In that regard, everyone is racist.

      I think Elon Musk is right. Unintentional racism happens. When it happens, it should be addressed, and apologies should be made. It's equally important for the victims to accept apology instead of escalating the situation. The most important thing is to maintain an open dialogue. Too often these situations end in finger pointing and name calling.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    35. Re:To be fair.... by quantaman · · Score: 2

      2) This works because the process required to get a government ID is fairly complicated

      This is pure racist bullshit. You are basically saying that it is so complicated only WHITE people can figure it out. That it is so complicated that Minorities can't figure it out. Queue up "Black people don't know where DMV is" level complicated.

      I'd excuse you as being innocently mistaken... except I cited an entire article that explained the sense in which is was complicated and it certainly wasn't "Black people don't know where DMV is". Among other things they tend not to have the secondary documentation that makes getting an ID easy. It's also talking about the specific subset of people who have trouble getting IDs to vote.

      And of course you have the fact that he's almost certainly cherry picking a very non-representative sample of interviewees.

      Again, that is YOUR assumption. However based on your own response, you committed the very same infractions, you just dressed it up in progressive code language.

      Here is the Progressive Trick, they use code language to call blacks and minorities "stupid" by labeling them all the same based on some hypothetical disenfranchised anecdotal reference.

      This is boring, I've been clear in how the issue is about the specific subset of minorities who can't get IDs, not minorities in general. I've got better things to do they trying to convince you to stop obfuscating my point in a 2 person argument.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    36. Re:To be fair.... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 0

      specific subset of minorities who can't get IDs

      No you haven't. You've posted an article using anecdotal evidence, and abstracted that out to being full on racist (intentional or not). the subset isn't "minorities" it is "people" and at the moment you stop categorizing people into subset groups based on color then I'll tend to agree with you. But that doesn't serve the narrative you're portraying.

      And in the end, you are the one that is racist, because the narrative ends up being the bigoted stereotype "minorities can't get IDs because they are stupid".

      The fact is, these people (not minorities) have specific issues that are rare and should be addressed. Specifically the article focuses on "Anthony Settles" who has a problem with not having properly changed his name when he was 14. This is not an issue because he is "black" (or any other minority) but because paperwork was never filled out. Further the article states ... " Settles has to go to court, a process that would cost him more than $250 — more than he is willing to pay."

      I realize that $250 is a lot of money to someone who is poor, but I am pretty sure that a good Liberal like yourself would be willing to raise everyone's taxes to solve problems like this. i.e. its solvable. But rather than solving the problem, let's just imply black people can't do something because of racism.

      Can you explain why being black has any relevance to Anthony Settles case? I doubt it.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    37. Re:To be fair.... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Racism is not tolerated in polite society

      Sounds like No True Scotsman to me. And who defines what is "a polite society" anyway?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    38. Re:To be fair.... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Um, you think a $250 fee is trivial? To me, it's not bad, but lots of people can't afford that. You appear to realize that fact, and you even appear to realize that people like me are in favor of tax money paying all expenses associated with getting to vote, and you still say something about not knowing where the DMV is?

      In states that want to require voter IDs, the DMV was the local place that was closed down last year, but now is fairly distant and not reachable by public transportation, and it's only open when somebody is working and is afraid to take a day off.

      As a leftist, I'm fine with voter ID, as long as acquiring the ID is free of charge and easy for everyone.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    39. Re:To be fair.... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Do not try being racist in my house. Best I can do.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    40. Re:To be fair.... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      So, it isn't a race issue, it is an economic one. Great, now we at least agree on something. However, repeating the claim it is "racist" to want an ID is tacitly racist in and of itself. THAT was my point.

      And not that it is economic in nature, we can solve that problem (a variety of ways).

      As a leftist, I'm fine with voter ID, as long as acquiring the ID is free of charge and easy for everyone.

      You're a rare minority. I just wish more leftists were more realistic. ;)

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  6. I find this very hard to believe. by jcr · · Score: 3, Funny

    Tossing off any racial epithet around here in the silicon valley is likely to make half of the people within earshot fall down in a swoon, and the other half going apeshit over it on twitter within milliseconds. The odds of this allegation turning out to be utter bullshit is approaching unity.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:I find this very hard to believe. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tossing off any racial epithet around here in the silicon valley is likely to make half of the people within earshot fall down in a swoon, and the other half going apeshit over it on twitter within milliseconds. The odds of this allegation turning out to be utter bullshit is approaching unity.

      -jcr

      Hang around Asian restaurants. Some of the most racist folks I have met in Silicon Valley are Asian, they hate mexicans or black folks and arent scared to say it.

      AC for reasons.

    2. Re:I find this very hard to believe. by Glarimore · · Score: 2

      I also have know idea if any of what is being alleged is actually true; however, your experience in white collar silicon valley land is most likely different than what happens on a factory production floor (tech company or not).

    3. Re:I find this very hard to believe. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Tossing off any racial epithet around here in the silicon valley is likely to make half of the people within earshot fall down in a swoon, and the other half going apeshit over it on twitter within milliseconds.

      Sort of like what happens in the South when a football player takes a knee.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:I find this very hard to believe. by phayes · · Score: 2

      And the victor in today's whataboutism contest is... PopeRatzo!

      Thanks for your contribution, it's really raising the bar in this cesspool known as slashdot...

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    5. Re:I find this very hard to believe. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      And the victor in today's whataboutism contest is... PopeRatzo!

      What do I win?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    6. Re:I find this very hard to believe. by phayes · · Score: 2

      Well it isn't our respect.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    7. Re:I find this very hard to believe. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      Well it isn't our respect.

      You can't give away what you don't have.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:I find this very hard to believe. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you may be misunderstanding the situation. If this were an engineer, I would agree that it's pretty unlikely that the kind of behavior describe really could exist.

      However, he was an auto plant worker, and it's more likely that the employees there grew up in places like San Bernadino County or southern Oregon than Los Angeles or San Francisco. Black people are pretty rare out West, especially so in those rural areas, so it's not surprising that there are lots of racists working in a California auto plant.

      dom

    9. Re:I find this very hard to believe. by phayes · · Score: 1

      We have respect for those with insightful and informative comments. We do not have any respect for people using whataboutism to make off-topic noise.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
  7. I, for one ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one would not mind if anybody called me "Whitey" or "Whiter" or whatever expression related to the colour of my skin.

    1. Re:I, for one ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cracker, cumskin, ghostskin, wyteboi, literally nothing anyone can say will make me feel bad or ashamed to be white.

    2. Re:I, for one ... by war4peace · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes but as a white male you're not entitled to anything, not to mention being offended. Being offended "ist verbotten", so to speak.
      As a Romanian guy, lacking insight into fine points of American culture, I wonder why can black people use the N word freely among themselves, but as soon as a white person uses it, they're screwed to no avail? Up until 2006-2007, I genuinely thought "What's up, N*?" was a normal and expected salute towards a black person, because I've seen it used in movies a lot of times. Boy, was I wrong.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    3. Re:I, for one ... by boudie2 · · Score: 1

      Albino?

    4. Re:I, for one ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe "cracker" is one of the derogatory terms towards Caucasians that some groups use. That said I would wager you are in the minority in the regards of your comment, most people don't like being offended especially to their face. Not to say I'm buying that this guy was encountering a pervasive racist work environment, as long a person can help them meet their production projections they would probably hire them no matter their race/ethnicity/weight/gender/age/eye color/blood type/sign/criminal history/etc. Discrimination is an untenable luxury when you're up against a deadline with billions of dollars at stake. Especially when your target consumer is generally the fickle civil rights/fair trade/Eco-friendly type, which I think is exactly what some people are counting on.

    5. Re:I, for one ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cracker, cumskin, ghostskin, wyteboi, literally nothing anyone can say will make me feel bad or ashamed to be white.

      That's because you have your white privilege to fall back on...

    6. Re:I, for one ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For what it's worth, nobody has an answer to that. It's just the way it is, I guess.

      N-word from white skinned face: racism, no matter the context or audience.
      N-word from dark skinned face: completely ok, and celebrated as cultural diversity.

      It makes no sense at all, and I don't blame you for not understanding it. I've lived in the United States for 39 years and I don't understand it any more than you do.

    7. Re:I, for one ... by Huge_UID · · Score: 1

      I wonder why can black people use the N word freely among themselves, but as soon as a white person uses it, they're screwed to no avail?

      Try this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ta-nehisi-coates-n-word-hip-hop-rap-why-white-people-shouldnt-use-video-explanation-a8053001.html

    8. Re:I, for one ... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      From the linked article:

      to be black is to walk through the world and watch people doing things that you cannot do, that you can’t join in and do.

      ...such as?

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    9. Re:I, for one ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For white people, I think the experience of being a hip-hop fan and not being able to use the word ‘n****r’ is actually very very insightful”, Mr Coates said. “It will give you just a little peek into the world of what it means to be black because to be black is to walk through the world and watch people doing things that you cannot do, that you can’t join in and do".

      I am not any smarter now. What things exactly? Is it something we can't talk about? Tao?

    10. Re:I, for one ... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Take a look at Fox News, plenty of white people on there getting offended...

      The reason that black people can, to some extent, use the N word while white people generally can't is historical reasons. Not just going back as far as slavery, there was segregation back in the 50s and even after that there was a lot of racism. The N word was used by white people to oppress black people, that's just a historical fact, and even today we see that it's still used in that manner by some people.

      Of course, white people can use the N word in some contexts, when it is very clear that they have a good, non-racist reason to. But for the most part, if a white person just says it without any context, or worse uses it to refer to a black person, due to the prevalence of white people using it abusively they probably won't get the benefit of the doubt from strangers.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:I, for one ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you notice how you had to spell it "N*" because even spelling out "Nigga" is so offensive that you can be banished from public life for even uttering it on a computer screen -- unless you're black, in which case you're part of the in-crowd. How does a black person even know if it's being written by a non-black person in order to be offended, I wonder?

      Of course, the idea is that a white person using the word (even in the affectionate form) is automatically a racist as bad as a KKK member, while the black person witnessing the usage can be righteously offended. Ironically though, the supposedly-righteous person is actually taking offense at the user being white, which means that it's really the offendee that's racist while the offender is merely using the vocabulary properly.

      And generally a black person will get so offended by being called a racist that they'll redefine the term such that it doesn't apply to them: "black people can't be racists!"

      dom

    12. Re:I, for one ... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Yes but as a white male you're not entitled to anything, not to mention being offended. Being offended "ist verbotten", so to speak.

      Ahh, yes, the modern western phenomena of having all the benefits in society but still wanting to play the victim card.

      Being a victim is in vogue, so naturally those who think its cool will go to any length to find a way to be a victim.

      Personally I'd rather be a person who has accomplished, regardless of any adversity (or lack there of) to someone looking for imaginary adversity to blame for their lack of accomplishments.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    13. Re:I, for one ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've always had issue with that bit of logic honestly. You see, I'm Polish, and pollock is a derogatory term for people of Polish decent. Under the logic he uses, it'd be fine for Poles to use it and nobody else should, yet amongst Poles, we don't particularly like it. At least for me, it's associated with being stupid and my intellect is my most prized trait. A Polish comedian who threw it around probably wouldn't be terribly popular. As such, it's used almost exclusively be non-poles. And when people use it, my response? I mostly just ignore it. It doesn't get me upset, I don't get offended, it's more of just an eye roll worthy sort of thing.

    14. Re:I, for one ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because it's something blacks can use as a power play against whites. It's just a word, no adult should be so offended by a word.

    15. Re:I, for one ... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      Such as using the n* word obviously... Oh wait.

      Is it just me or is there something funny about a person explaining why "X people can do something but Y people can't" and then have the justification be along the lines of "X people can do something that Y people can't because X people can't do what Y people do".

    16. Re:I, for one ... by penandpaper · · Score: 0

      The N word was used by white people to oppress black people

      How can words oppress people? Are words actions? You give an inordinate amount of power to words. Policy oppresses and no one denies the policy of the past. People and individuals have behavior and no one denies the past behavior motivated by race can oppress people. Words communicate and no one denies it can communicate horrible things.

      I can call you every bad word in the dictionary and that would not oppress you. How can words oppress you if you don't let it? There has to be an action or authority that enforces an action to keep you down. Again, no denies that those actions and authority didn't occur and they used those words.

      If it was as clear and powerful as you make it, why didn't the other racial epitaphs keep their power? Hint, because those people didn't let it keep them down.

      that's just a historical fact,

      It's historical fact that the word was used as a slur. Why don't other historical slurs have the same power as the n* word? No other race or word has the same rules applied (which word is censored by /. again?)

    17. Re:I, for one ... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Informative

      How can words oppress people?

      Calling someone the N word re-enforces stereotypes about them. If words really had no effect, people wouldn't bother with them.

      I can call you every bad word in the dictionary and that would not oppress you.

      Check my post history here on Slashdot. I get called an "SJW" a lot, and look at how it affects the response to my posts. Perfectly reasonable arguments result in "troll" and "flamebait" mods, and when people respond they assume all kinds of crazy things. Here is an example from today: https://slashdot.org/comments....

      In other words, relentless use of terms like "SJW" have had a very real oppressive effect on me. I'm not crying victim here, this is a relatively minor annoyance and certainly nothing compared to what people of colour have to put up with.

      If it was as clear and powerful as you make it, why didn't the other racial epitaphs keep their power?

      Because of history. White people in particular did not start from the position of being enslaved and legally 2nd class citizens in the US.

      No other race or word has the same rules applied

      Can't speak for the US but you can be prosecuted just as much for calling someone a cracker as the n word in the UK.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    18. Re:I, for one ... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Like... "if I can't have the house you have, then you can't have the car I have" kind of thing.
      Yes, its illogical.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    19. Re:I, for one ... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      If words really had no effect, people wouldn't bother with them.

      Yea, communication. It can do both great and horrible things. But the point I was making that oppression requires an action to follow. If there is no action then you decide if you are oppressed as you have demonstrated later in your post (quoted below).

      Check my post history here on Slashdot. I get called an "SJW" a lot, and look at how it affects the response to my posts. Perfectly reasonable arguments result in "troll" and "flamebait" mods, and when people respond they assume all kinds of crazy things. Here is an example from today: ... In other words, relentless use of terms like "SJW" have had a very real oppressive effect on me. I'm not crying victim here, this is a relatively minor annoyance and certainly nothing compared to what people of colour have to put up with.

      You let the term "SJW" affect your posts and you announce to everyone that it bothers you (through sig and previous posts). Aside from the mods (which have their own problems of disagree == troll etc), you decide how to respond or what words get to you. Any ad hominem has this potential effect. If my response to you was "You're an idiot'" I would imagine you would disregard it much more easily than if I called you an "SJW". You give "SJW" more power over you by your reaction to the word. If I was an asshole* trying to get you mad I would use the term you have specified bothers you. You give the term "SJW" power by not treating it like another dumb ad hominem. The more power you give the more it will be used because it works to bother you.

      I think why is because you know you're not an idiot so it's easy to disregard. My guess is that with SJW** you support social justice and bastardizing something you support/like into something ugly is bothersome. It's harder to disregard because it isn't a simple refutation because there is a part that you identify with. That's the point of insulting someone like that and I think you conflate that with 're-enforces sterotypes'. A powerful insult has some grain of truth.

      N*, is similar. Historically, it was neutral referring to skin color as Spanish/Portuguese negro or Latin's niger. The reaction to the word through history has shaped how powerful it is today. The underlying truth that hurts is the reference to color and using part of your identity as an insult is bothersome. But it only has power if you let it just as other racial slurs do not carry the same weight as N*. The word itself, it's history, or it's small historical truth (referencing skin color in a neutral way) does not oppress anyone. The reactions over time has given it power that enables ass holes to be more insulting because they know it bothers people.

      * Ok, I am prolly ass hole.

      ** I know there are a lot of definitions out there and it changes depending on who you talk to. For common usage the insult part I think we can agree is the militancy part or the 'warrior' part. Is why social justice advocate is not an insult by most.

      prosecuted just as much for calling someone a cracker

      Not big on salt much, eh? Personally, I love 'em in chowder. MMMM cannibalism. The right kind of meat.

    20. Re:I, for one ... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      I don't have time to do a long response now, but okay there needs to be action for oppression, but are you really saying that speech does not often lead to action?

      The law recognises this, e.g. incitement and conspiracy.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    21. Re:I, for one ... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      but are you really saying that speech does not often lead to action

      It can but what causes harm is the important part and how easily it is defined. In addition there is no thought crime. Now before you jump on cause harm. Harm is a physical thing. Cause harm means you are forced to respond with a physical action to protect your person or property. The examples you mention and things like slander or libel cause harm and are well defined. Incitement is easily identified and does not represent a single idea just as conspiracy. Just like threats of violence, credible incitement and conspiracy would result in a response by a reasonable person to protect themselves.

      Which is more dangerous the gun that kill X per year or the idea that kills millions? If you choose the later then should ideas be criminal?

    22. Re:I, for one ... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I disagree, being denied opportunities and services is harm.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    23. Re:I, for one ... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      Those are protected by law as well. Also, that is no longer in the realm of speech but action (refusing to hire or back for the bus policy). I would agree that denied opportunity and services is harmful and that is why it is illegal to do that on the basis of immutable characteristics. If there are institutions breaking the law or policy not inline with the law then we can name individual examples and fix them.

      I fail to see your point.

    24. Re:I, for one ... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      I'm not taking about refusing to hire. I'm taking about rating candidates with black sounding names lower. Might not be conscious.

      This is all well understood, been studied in detail for decades. Don't take this the wrong way, but I'm not really interested in giving you all that research that you could look at yourself if you really wanted to understand racism. It's like wanting to question gravity in a debate about aircraft design.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    25. Re:I, for one ... by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      I wonder why can black people use the N word freely among themselves, but as soon as a white person uses it, they're screwed to no avail?

      Because in the past, a lot of white racists have used the word, and then gone on to assault or kill the black person they are saying it to.

      When a white person says the N word, the black person being addressed has a legitimate fear of being in a dangerous situation.

      When a black person uses the N word, it's pretty clear they're not using the word because they hate black people, so there is no danger and nothing needs to be avoided.

      The same goes for other racial slurs, and many other "offensive" behaviors in general (for example, Holocaust jokes are more likely to be considered in good taste if made by a Jew).

    26. Re:I, for one ... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      I don't see your point going from "white people saying words like N* oppresses black people" to unconscious bias toward black sounding names on resumes in France. You're off the reservation and missed the bus.

    27. Re:I, for one ... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Not merely saying it, but using it when referring to someone or some group of people.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    28. Re:I, for one ... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      That is very different than unconscious bias toward black sounding names on resumes in France. That also doesn't address anything I have said in any previous comment.

      But at least you found the bus stop. In the mean time, I am going to fly away because you are going no where.

    29. Re:I, for one ... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Really? So you're saying that if the unarmed skinny white me goes to a group of BIG black fellas who play basketball and says the N-word, they're going to have "a legitimate fear of being in a dangerous situation"? Again, I'm not an American, but I have a really hard time believing this.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    30. Re:I, for one ... by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      Where do you draw the line? One skinny guy? A bunch of skinny guys? A bunch of skinny guys who might have concealed weapons?

      Since it's difficult to draw the line well, it's simpler to just have a societal convention "never say this word to people of that race". It's not like anyone really *needs* to say the word, after all.

    31. Re:I, for one ... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      That's fine, just say "don't say that word because we're educated to believe it has negative connotations" instead of making up illogical reasons.
      As I was saying, my culture did not educate me to assign negative connotations to the word, so I had to make a conscious effort to put it into that category. I was also educated in such a way that I believe that a bad word is a bad word regardless who says it. Furthermore it could be acceptable to say a bad word among friends, for example, but that solely depends on how well you know that person, not what color their skin is.

      To me, skin color is totally irrelevant. It's how you behave that matters.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  8. Corporate culture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Once again I have to wonder why anyine imagines Silicon Valley corporate culture is magically any different from any other corporate culture. There are just as many unethical crooks and slimeballs as there are in any other humongous company.

  9. Part of the recent lay-offs? by WoLpH · · Score: 1

    With the massive lay-offs at Tesla recently I have to wonder, was this man simply layed off because of poor performance and trying to get money some other way now?

    I'm not saying Tesla isn't racist, I have no clue what goes on in the company but it seems that he's been happy to work at the "racist" company until he got fired.

    1. Re:Part of the recent lay-offs? by Major+Blud · · Score: 2

      was this man simply layed off because of poor performance

      The article says he was let go in October, which is when the layoffs occurred for "performance reasons", so that could be the case.
      https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/1...

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    2. Re:Part of the recent lay-offs? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I wonder, what's the chance he was let go for being a shit employee?

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  10. fishy by Dorianny · · Score: 1

    I find it rather odd that he and his lawyers are trying to sue on behalf of a group of more then 100 people when he is the only one to have come forward with allegations

    1. Re:fishy by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      If someone was willing to sue on your behalf (you get to participate in the upside if they win), why on earth would you come forward? To get fired when the case gets filed and/or when the case loses?

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  11. I dunno, I'm an SJW but ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This one I gotta go with pics or ... ?
    Are there multiple witnesses? Does he evidence?
    [ Of course I didn't actually read the article and only skimmed the summary you newb! ]

    I'm as far left whatever the hell that means on social issues as one can get without being a campus thought policer but I'm wait and see here.

  12. Culpability by ytene · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As a human being, I hang my head in shame for the fact that, in the 21st century, we still have to deal with racism. I just wish we could all grow up and behave like the advanced species we claim to be.

    One aspect of this story particularly interests me - and it might be a subtle, legal point - which is: what is/are the responsibilities of "Tesla the Company", with respect to tackling and preventing racism in the workplace?

    I am not for one moment suggesting that the claims of this plaintiff are anything less than genuine. What interests me is: as an employer, where do Tesla's responsibilities stop? Do they have to have anti-racism training for their staff? Do they have to have a grievance procedure? Do they have to have an anonymous whistleblowing program? Are there other things that an employer needs to demonstrate in order to avoid accusations of institutional racism?

    The reason I ask the original question is that it seems to me that we need to understand the difference between "Tesla the Company" and "Tesla's Other Employees". I would be willing to accept the words of the complaint that suggest that some employees at Tesla are out-and-out racists. I would hope that Tesla are doing all they can to identify and expel such people. But does the presence of one or more racist employees at any company mean that the company itself is racist?

    If not, how do we make the differentiation? Is it when 10% of employees are racist? 20%? Is it if the company fails to handle accusations of racism appropriately - and, if so, what does "appropriate handling" need to include?

    This is a sensitive, emotive and hugely important topic for us as a society: it is, perhaps, one of the defining aspects of human history over the last few hundred years, so I think that our response to this - as individuals, employers, colleagues and friends - is hugely important.

    But much as I'm concerned by these claims and would want to see some solid evidence of a reasonable response to them, I'm struggling to make the leap from "a number of employees at Company X demonstrated racist behaviour" as being equal to "Company X is racist".

    Is this reasonable skepticism, or is this splitting hairs that an unethical company would hide behind? Is it fair to make the distinction? What would be the indicators you would look for, in a case like this, before you would conclude that a company was racist?

    1. Re:Culpability by davecotter · · Score: 0

      mod parent up please

    2. Re:Culpability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know the answers to your questions, because I stopped reading immediately after "As a human being..."

      Just letting you know.

    3. Re:Culpability by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Most jurisdictions require companies to act when they become aware of racism. Presumably management were made aware somehow (complaint, saw it happening) and failed to act of he is intending to sue.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Culpability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thank you for sharing how much virtue you have. Black people are now free of racism due to your post.

    5. Re:Culpability by VocationalZero · · Score: 1
      As a human being, I don't hang my head in shame for the poor decisions other humans make. That would be deeply narcissistic and irrationally collectivist. Instead, I realize they too are only human and make mistakes and give into hatred to try to compensate for their losses or retaliate for perceived wrongs.

      I also understand that some, typically those without actual problems of their own, seek to feel guilt and shame by taking on the woes of society as their own personal plight, often without even understanding the driving forces behind what they see in front of them. I also understand that juvenile wishing for "utopia now", and the disdain for the world that does not match their ideals, does come from a place of genuine concern. I also understand the temptation to jump to conclusions, especially when the perceived victim is of a protected class.

      What I don't understand is why a post that poses far more questions than it offers answers has been modded "insightful". IANAL, but I'll give it a shot.

      ...what is/are the responsibilities of "Tesla the Company", with respect to tackling and preventing racism in the workplace?

      Tesla has a legal responsibility to report any illegal activities, including hate crimes.

      Do they have to have anti-racism training for their staff? Do they have to have a grievance procedure? Do they have to have an anonymous whistleblowing program?

      Legally, I don't think so, but again, IANAL.

      Are there other things that an employer needs to demonstrate in order to avoid accusations of institutional racism?

      There is no way to avoid accusation of institutional racism, aside from actual censorship. Anyone can accuse anyone of anything, and often people do make false accusations (not saying this is a false accusation) for profit or political motivations. As far as public opinion goes, there is no course they can force on their employees that could ever convince people that they are not racist if they get a bad reputation. Google, for instance, one of the most progressive companies on the planet, is often crucified in the media, and widely thought of as a racist and sexist organization. It is a stain that can only really fade with time.

      But does the presence of one or more racist employees at any company mean that the company itself is racist? If not, how do we make the differentiation?

      A company can only really be considered racist if they have company-wide racist policies or tolerate / encourage racist behavior from the top. Almost exclusively though, racism in a company is the direct result of a few individuals and those that tolerate them. Condemning the entire company for the actions of a few is irrational.

      Is it when 10% of employees are racist? 20%? Is it if the company fails to handle accusations of racism appropriately - and, if so, what does "appropriate handling" need to include?

      Do those types of companies even exist in the US? How many of us do you really think are racist?

      The best any reasonable person could expect is an executive's apology and a statement of condemnation of the employees responsible for the behavior, and the firing of said employees and any managers that looked the other way. I am slightly skeptical that racial sensitivity training would have any real impact.

      ...Is this reasonable skepticism, or is this splitting hairs that an unethical company would hide behind?

      What if they truly did nothing wrong? What response should they give then? Not to say that Tesla doesn't operate unethically, but shouldn't we have some actual evidence before condemning the entire organization as racist, on the word of a single employee? And yes, just because a company does everything they can to "fix" the issue, they are mostly trying to save face. Of course, they also probably wish it was never an issue to begin with. The world is not black and white.

    6. Re:Culpability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The simple answer is, "it depends"

      US Federal laws are almost all geared towards people who speak for or are empowered make decisions for the company, against anyone that could be an employee of that company (or potential employees in the case of hiring practices)

      That first group tends to be management, directors, or officers of the company.
      They do not mention your peers, however if you report a problem with a peer to HR, who by definition is run by an officer or manager, HR not acting on such a complaint can be taken as an official view of the company.

      Most companies have policy to punish if not fire such peer type employees so they can't be accused of allowing by way of not preventing.
      But legally the bare minimum required is for HR to not ignore the problem.
      IE to tell that peer to quit, and the related paperwork to show they did that. So long as HR can show they didn't sit there on their ass and do absolutely nothing, they at least are not violating federal law.

      State law on the other hand can and has raised the bar on the minimum requirements of action.
      But since those vary by state, I couldn't tell you the situation for Tesla.

      Obviously all of the above is strictly limited to legal responsibilities. Morally a companies directors can set any policy they want so long as it at least meets the legal minimum.
      Some have a "zero tolerance" policy for their employees to follow. Others only put in the bare minimum to meet legal requirements.

    7. Re:Culpability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did because I do read comments before posting responses. You were correct however in your suspicions. A large block of virtue signaling text preceded by the appropriate red flag.

    8. Re:Culpability by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      I just wish we could all grow up and behave like the advanced species we claim to be.

      Advanced species? Are you on drugs?

      One aspect of this story particularly interests me - and it might be a subtle, legal point - which is: what is/are the responsibilities of "Tesla the Company", with respect to tackling and preventing racism in the workplace?

      Tesla is a daycare facility.

      I am not for one moment suggesting that the claims of this plaintiff are anything less than genuine.

      In what way if any is this non suggestion different from the following:
      I am not for one moment suggesting that the claims of this plaintiff have merit.

      What interests me is: as an employer, where do Tesla's responsibilities stop?

      Depends on how good lawyers are at capturing the legal system. Ultimately the right answer: liability is infinite and responsibilities never end.

      Do they have to have an anonymous whistleblowing program?

      That's hot.

      Are there other things that an employer needs to demonstrate in order to avoid accusations of institutional racism?

      Accusations + clickbait media + social media = utopian paradise

      The reason I ask the original question is that it seems to me that we need to understand the difference between "Tesla the Company" and "Tesla's Other Employees"

      Corporations are people, my friend.

      But does the presence of one or more racist employees at any company mean that the company itself is racist?

      If not, how do we make the differentiation? Is it when 10% of employees are racist? 20%? Is it if the company fails to handle accusations of racism appropriately - and, if so, what does "appropriate handling" need to include?

      What percentage of Chinese have to be involved in hax0r1ng before it is safe to declare all of China hax0rz?

      But much as I'm concerned by these claims and would want to see some solid evidence of a reasonable response to them, I'm struggling to make the leap from "a number of employees at Company X demonstrated racist behaviour" as being equal to "Company X is racist".

      Failure to take the leap is a strong indicator you condone and actively support racist behavior. Now if you'll excuse me I have to go geo-ban all Chinese datagrams from China.

      Is this reasonable skepticism, or is this splitting hairs that an unethical company would hide behind? Is it fair to make the distinction? What would be the indicators you would look for, in a case like this, before you would conclude that a company was racist?

      +++
      ATH

    9. Re:Culpability by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      Victim files written complaint with HR. HR Reviews the complaint, meets with all parties, requires the "aggressor" to take sensitivity training, and reiterates a policy of non-discrimination to all employees.

      Repeat offenses lead to termination.

      Check all boxes, and the company has done what it needs to do.

    10. Re:Culpability by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Tesla employs over 50,000 people world wide. I'd be shocked if there *weren't* racists in the mix.

      A company's managers have the responsibility under state and federal law to maintain a hostility-free workplace, which includes being free of discrimination against protected groups defined by law, which includes race. If this guy can show that there was racial discriminatory behavior that went unchallenged and uncorrected by the management at multiple levels, then he has a case. But that's a hard one to prove, and the burden will be on him to do so.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    11. Re:Culpability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "As a human being"... LOL.

      Surely you meant to say "As a JEW"?

    12. Re:Culpability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Advanced species? Humanity is barely out of its infancy, with most members throwing tantrums and believing what it wants regardless of reality.

  13. Re:It's all Trump's fault by nwaack · · Score: 1

    Did you copy/paste this from HuffPost? Vox, maybe? Actually, now that I think about, I feel like I heard this on American Horror Story.

  14. Unions by ArchieBunker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is coming from the unions who want into the plant. Notice how they are checking every box with race, gender, sexuality? Tesla said no so now the unions file frivolous lawsuits.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  15. Re:It's all Trump's fault by war4peace · · Score: 1

    Are you talking about the guy who made the allegations or those against who he sued? 'cause I really can't tell.

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  16. An African-American employee... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    =Automatic racism lawsuit.

  17. Re: It's all Trump's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FFS. Get a life. Not everything bad in the country is because of Trump.
    I'm no Trump fan, but just give it up already. The general public is sick and tired of you pleebes blaming Trump for everything. It's gotten old.

    Racists exists regardless of who is in the White House.

  18. Re:It's all Trump's fault by boudie2 · · Score: 1

    Maybe you should check what "civilized decency" means. How rude!

  19. Positive attitude by Freischutz · · Score: 1

    ...terminated in late October for "not having a positive attitude."

    I love the bullshit reasons they come up with when they lay you off. I was was overworked at Hard Rock Cafe as a dish washer on minimum wage for one summer years ago when I was still a student. The washing machine broke down regularly meaning I had to hand wash everything during the lunch and evening rushes and I was doing a two man job even when the damn machine worked and cleaning out all the crusty kitchen pots as well. Needless to say I was none too happy about that and made this known. Eventually they solved the problem, not by fixing the machine and hiring a second worker (which there was supposed to be), but by laying me off and hiring somebody who was easier to bully. When the manager came to axe me just before closing time one night he actually told me I was being laid off for, and I quote: 'not getting into the Hard Rock spirit'. I laughed so hard I coughed. Then I thanked him for an excellent joke and handed him the apron fast enough that it did not occur to him to refuse to accept the slimy food particle encrusted thing and left. I didn't hand him the dirty rag with any ill intent mind you but he ended up holding it and was none to happy about it since he was a rather bacteria-phobic neat freak. For a while afterwards I regretted not telling him to shove it up his ass but then I decided that there was no reason to be rude and leaving him there with smelly 8 hour old slimy food particles all over his well groomed yuppie hands was probably way better.

    1. Re:Positive attitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lets find this guy and cover him in radioactive bacteria

    2. Re:Positive attitude by CaptnCrud · · Score: 1

      Was the guy bald, 5 nothing, in his 30's and act like a little hitler? ...Seems to always be that guy. I could never figure out if they actually drank the koolaid that heavy or if they are that desperate to be a manager over "something".

    3. Re:Positive attitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they weren't happy with the job you were doing, and invited you to explore other opportunities. You feel that it's because you didn't have the resources available to you in order to do the job properly, and management was unwilling to provide those resources.

      Why would you want to work in those shitty conditions to begin with? Sounds like that guy did you a favor. You should be thanking him, not telling him to shove a dirty apron up his ass.

    4. Re:Positive attitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was the guy bald, 5 nothing, in his 30's and act like a little hitler? ...Seems to always be that guy. I could never figure out if they actually drank the koolaid that heavy or if they are that desperate to be a manager over "something".

      Or an Eric Cartman...

  20. $$$ modern retirement plan $$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, beats working.

  21. And so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They aren't White. Save it for the next Anglo that passes by.

  22. This is what happens by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    When you don't make your extortion payments to Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  23. As a middle aged white guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want to sue The Rockettes and The Knicks, neither one would look at my resume.

    Talk about ageist and sexist, those two are bonkers.

  24. I have a question... by JustNiz · · Score: 2

    >> Vaughn alleged that employees and supervisors regularly used the "N word" around him and other black colleagues.

    I wonder what ratio of the employees and supervisors using the N word were also black?

    1. Re:I have a question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA...it was blacks and hispanics being racist against each other. But of course it's all whitey's fault.

    2. Re:I have a question... by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      I DID RTFA. YOU read it. No mention at all of it being blacks and hispanics.

  25. Oblig. Troll.. by SJ · · Score: 4, Funny

    Elon was born in Africa, now he's American. Wouldn't that make him an African-American as well?

    1. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His cars are ElonRigged.

    2. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by slew · · Score: 1

      Elon was born in Africa, now he's American. Wouldn't that make him an African-American as well?

      We may not have all been born in Africa, but we likely all originated from Africa...
      Does that make us all African-American? Or do you arbitrarily stop labeling at the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th generation? Or is the phrase "African-American" simply a modern euphemism for people that have retained a specific skin melanin phenotype/genotype?

    3. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by Babel-17 · · Score: 1

      A long time ago I worked with "an Italian American" who was born in Libya. The company we worked for had government contracts and IIRC on at least one job he was listed as being African.

    4. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Follow up...

      White Guy from Africa: I am African-American
      Black Guy from Ohio: You're not African-American! Your not black!

      Now who's the racist?

    5. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are discovering even that is not that clear cut, with fossils much older than expected found in Germany and China...

    6. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elon was born in Africa, now he's American. Wouldn't that make him an African-American as well?

      No, it makes him an American-African immigrant to America (Canadian's would claim he's a Canadian-African immigrant, however actually both the USA and Canada are parts of the continent of America, so he's also American). Different from an African-American.

    7. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's so much of a euphemism that Americans sometimes refer to non-Americans of African descent as being African-American. A friend of mine, British born to Jamaican parents had it happen and took great offense "I'm neither African or American, I'm a Londoner!"

    8. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that make us all African-American?

      No, only those of us who are American.

    9. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Elon was born in Africa, now he's American. Wouldn't that make him an African-American as well?

      Yep, I get this is a joke but African-American has been used to describe American born people who trace their lineage back to Africa, not anyone from Africa or who is black (I.E a black Latino or black Englishman).

      However as an Anglo, I've never got the the hang up Americans have over saying things directly. You can speak about race and colour without being racist, its actually quite easy. Here in the UK a black Englishman would describe his skin colour as black and his ethnicity as English. There isn't really a difference between a black Englishman and a white Englishman.

      Being racist is about having a negative intent towards a race, not about avoiding certain adjectives.

      Also, you'll never hear the term African-English, it would connotate that they are a dual citizen of Africa and England although in that case you'd mention the country in questions, like Kenya and even then they'd describe themselves as Kenyan or English.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    10. Re:Oblig. Troll.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or do you arbitrarily stop labeling at the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th generation?

      What?

      Who the fuck does this to begin with? People that do this should stop.

      Labeling creates division. Division is bad. The treatment of anyone that is not 'us' is why people want equality to begin with.

      Got it?

  26. I"m not sure you're about Federal vs Superior by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    but if I was going to file a discrimination suit I'd try to keep it out of the feds. We had 8 years of right wing presidents (debatable 16 since Clinton was pretty right wing) followed by 8 years of blocked judicial appointments. I'm not so sure you're going to get anywhere with a federal suit. The courts are pretty well stacked in the other camp. People forget just how much power a president with a compliant congress has over our legal system...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re: I"m not sure you're about Federal vs Superior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck are you talking about?

      Leftists controlled the entire government for years. They only lost control after they blatantly lied and fucked everything up.

      The Democrat majority didn't obstruct shit, you imbecile. They were just breathtakingly incompetent.

  27. NWA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ......ring a bell?

    If it was "pre Civil rights era treatment" they wouldn't have had a job in the first place. Thier lawyer is suffering a rhetoric deficiency.

  28. tough test for slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which so often resembles a Breitbart comment section.

  29. I doubt it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We recently laid off an Indian employee because there wasn't enough IT work to justify his big salary. He filed a union complaint charging racial and religious discrimination. There was no discrimination at all and he presented zero evidence of it, so that was quickly squashed. The employee had a son that also worked there and he quit months before that. He also complained of racial and religious discrimination in an email to the higher ups among other things. I'm not sure why because he sucked at his job and then quit on his own. The lawyers lol'ed at his complaint because his boss was also Indian, as were a few of his co-workers. They all said he sucked at his job. Stupid people will claim all kinds of things. If there is real evidence, then it will come out. I've never seen brazen racism at any place I've worked so I have to be skeptical about claims like the ones at Tesla. If those are true, then all people involved need to be fired.

  30. Re:It's all Trump's fault by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

    What the fuck are you on about?

    This story has literally nothing to do with the Orange Combover. Especially since the allegations haven't been proven in any way, shape, substance, or form. It's literally one guy and his lawyer saying "uh-huh!" after the company said "nuh-uhh!"

    It's amazing how some people will do some extreme contortions to relate literally anything to the Dorito-tinted-Commander-in-Chief; it's probably the same people that did the piss and moan about the exact same thing when other people were doing amazing contortions to non-ironically proclaim "Thanks, Obama!"

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  31. I got fired as a shitty worker. RACISM BITCH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wah wah wah.

    People at Tesla thought they had it pretty good.
    That they could continue doing the shit job they were doing and it'd never end.
    Like Tesla was a Detroit dinosaur, mired in union bullshit.

    BZZT!

    So, now that this shitheels has been kicked to the curb, he's gonna pull the race card.
    Because, let's face it, who in this country HASN'T pulled the race cade lately?

    Well...except for white heterosexual males...y'know, the "root of all evil".

  32. My inside track by AlanObject · · Score: 1

    My housekeeper's husband works as a welder at the Tesla plant. I might see him later this week so I'm going to ask him what he thinks about this. (He's Hispanic and a pretty good guy.) Unfortunately the way that Slashdot works this thread will be pretty much dead and buried by the time I learn anything worth contributing. But if the question comes up again I'll post it.

    As far as other Tesla people I run into at the various lunch establishments in the neighborhood -- they are all preoccupied with getting Series 3 production up to speed. They don't seem to have much else to talk about.

  33. Thanksgiving with Elon: no dark meat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stay away from the Musk household this November.

  34. Credibility is a big factor by Babel-17 · · Score: 1

    Saying that the production floor was a "hotbed for racist behavior" is an extraordinary claim imo. I find it a lot easier believe that a few workers were subject to racism that flew under the radar of Tesla supervisors than I do that the production floor at Tesla was a "hotbed for racist behavior". But that claim does make Tesla more desirous for this matter to get settled than a lesser charge would. Racism exists in the world, and so does the desire to profit off of claiming it. Both things could be true here. The complainant may well have received treatment that deserves a lawsuit, and he may also be bullshitting about the production floor being a "hotbed for racist behavior". If the complaint is based on fact then Tesla deserves a shakeup. If the complaint is a gross exaggeration then there should be repercussions to that. It's too serious a crime to claim it's having happened as a ploy. Well, hopefully truth will out.

  35. Re:It's all Trump's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not that Dolt45 did anything to cause this situation, just that he changed the culture to enable it.

    Prior to Drumpf announcing his candidacy, racism was something one did not verbally express in polite society, much the way one might not curse in front of ladies a century ago. After he announced his candidacy by essentially declaring Mexicans as rapists and murderers, the culture changed such that racists felt that it was OK to verbally express racism, much like it is now acceptable to curse in front of a lady.

    Now, the Command-Turd-in-Chief did nothing to make those people racists or cause them to make the defendant feel harrassed, but he did make it so they thought it was more acceptable than before. You can see this also in the FBI's reported uptick in hate crimes since the election and in the "Unite the Right" rallies.

    dom

  36. Hotbed of Union Media Slurs more like by seoras · · Score: 2

    Isn't this getting a bit old and lame? All we hear about Tesla here on /. is how they are keeping the unions out and how the are a hive of horrors for workers.
    Can we stop with the propaganda and get back to the techie stuff that keeps us reading here.

  37. Only hire white males by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only hire white males and you will not have these problems.

  38. Re:It's all Trump's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I understand that right-wing white supremacist KKK nazi trash would be terrified by the idea that they would be forced to live in a world where they would have to show respect to their black neighbor, or their homosexual coworker, or their female boss, or where they would no longer be allowed to bully and exploit the less fortunate, control and abuse their wives or rape their daughters.

    But you'll excuse me for not giving a flying fuck about their anxieties.

  39. Re:It's all Trump's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the matter, little conservative snowflake ? Triggered by the fact that freedom of speech applies to everyone and not just to right-wing white supremacists when they want to spew their racist KKK nazi filth ?

    So calling out the scum of the earth for what they are is considered rude now ?

  40. Re:It's all Trump's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry folks, he got out again. We got him back into the straitjacket and he won't be bothering anyone anymore now. Please resume your discussion.

  41. Re:It's all Trump's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, it took longer than usual for the Trumpist filth to mod me down. As if suppressing my right to free speech (something that they continually blame the left for, prooving that they are hypocritical scum) would somehow make the truth of their digusting nature less true.

    Why don't you vote for Harvey Weinstein for president next, scumbags ?

  42. This is irrelevant and masturbation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is irrelevant and masturbation.