James Damore Sues Google For Allegedly Discriminating Against Conservative White Men (theverge.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: The author of the controversial memo that upended Google in August is suing the company, alleging that white, male conservatives are systematically discriminated against by Google. James Damore was fired as an engineer after a manifesto questioning the benefits of diversity programs was widely passed around the company. In a new lawsuit, he and another fired engineer claim that "employees who expressed views deviating from the majority view at Google on political subjects raised in the workplace and relevant to Google's employment policies and its business, such as 'diversity' hiring policies, 'bias sensitivity,' or 'social justice,' were/are singled out, mistreated, and systematically punished and terminated from Google, in violation of their legal rights."

Comments

Let's see....

[GerryGilmore]

From the suit: "employees who expressed views deviating from the majority view at Google on political subjects raised in the workplace and relevant to Google's employment policies and its business, such as 'diversity' hiring policies, 'bias sensitivity,' or 'social justice,' were/are singled out, mistreated, and systematically punished and terminated from Google, in violation of their legal rights." So, Google has internal policies to, say, promote "diversity" and this a-hole doesn't like it, raises a big stink causing huge PR problems for Google just so he can claim his SJW cred and we're supposed to feel sorry for him? No. Any employees of mine who went around bad-mouthing my company would find themselves out of a job pretty god-damned quickly. And, NO - there is no law preventing an employer from firing someone for being an asshole.

Re: Finally

[RedK]

Trump's insistence that the White Supremacist's were damn fine folks whose statues to traitors are more important than something like disaater relief for Puerto Rico.

Except none of this happened, so your entire premise is wrong.

Re:"after a manifesto ..."

[drinkypoo]

You're right. It didn't go on quite long enough to be a manifesto. It was more of an uninformed rant.

You're a liar, because his "uninformed rant" was sourced.

You're an idiot, just like James Damore, who did not understand the papers he was citing, and therefore got the science wrong. You don't get any points for misusing science. The authors of some of the papers he cited felt strongly enough about it that they came out and said that he got it wrong, so we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is mis-citing papers. You are ignoring this to make your hero seem intelligent and correct, when he is neither.