3 ms·

> I was getting preferential treatment because of my “cuteness factor” > Indian women being subservient I agree that these comments don't belong in the workpl

by sqldba 10y ago

> I was getting preferential treatment because of my “cuteness factor” > Indian women being subservient I agree that these comments don't belong in the workplace. I have seen similar ones lead to people fired on the day and escorted to the door. Thankfully it's relatively rare but some places do take it very seriously. Apple was wrong. In Australia the law is clear and they've breached it. Take them to court and get your payout. It's annoying that the victim has to do that but it's possible. For other parts of the article I put myself in her shoes and didn't find management's treatment of her particularly different from how I (a male) would be treated after complaining about the actions of anyone else (male or female) in the workplace - which is why I don't. HR is ineffectual and the company is against you regardless of whomever is at fault. It just wants one or the other party gone so things can go back to normal, so if it's you versus five other people it's easier to fire and rehire one than five. > employers also have an obligation to handle the situation with empathy and integrity And this line stood out at me as being divorced from reality especially at a big company. I get it that we mostly want companies to be like this but I think it's also obvious that they're not. They are primarily profit motivated and we're lucky if they don't pollute the environment or commit atrocities in the process. You can look for smaller companies that do it, you can put it in your own company, but if you really felt Apple would be like that then it's being a little naive. I worked at one mid-size company that was acquired by a competitor who wanted to drive in the boot heel by firing the previous management in as embarrassing a way as possible. My boss was on the chopping block and had false charges levelled at him over email and summarily fired. He took it through the Australian workplace relations system to try to get some closure, until the government advised there's no law to prevent a company making anything up and firing you for it. He could have pursued defamation but that's also extremely difficult, long, and expensive, and he didn't have the money. It was at that point I grew up in my career and decided you really can't trust any company to look out for you. That's not how it works.

provost 10y ago
> Apple was wrong. In Australia the law is clear and they've breached it. Take them to court and get your payout Is the OP in Australia?
- dublinben 10y ago
  The article is pretty clear that she was in the US. Not sure what Australian law has to do with this.
csydas 10y ago
> And this line stood out at me as being divorced from reality especially at a big company. I get it that we mostly want companies to be like this but I think it's also obvious that they're not. They are primarily profit motivated and we're lucky if they don't pollute the environment or commit atrocities in the process. You can look for smaller companies that do it, you can put it in your own company, but if you really felt Apple would be like that then it's being a little naive. I do not disagree that this is true, but I would suggest that this also is not an acceptable status quo. Complacency doesn't help it, and the unfortunate reality is that most companies just want to get into a battle of wills with those who are targets of harassment rather than take the time to address the issue as they should be. You are right that this seems to happen once you breach a certain threshold - I assume at that point legal gets more pre-emptive in its protection of the company and tries to divorce itself from the goings-on in Human Resource areas. Plus, as I said elsewhere in this discussion, finding and/or training managers to handle these issues in a fair way is not easy, nor is it easy to be the manager dealing with this situation. But I don't think that complacency is the answer, and she's not wrong that in many countries, the employer does have an obligation to handle the events. Attributing the sensations to it I'm not sure I fully agree with, but many countries do require investigative procedures, which according to the article weren't really performed well by management at Apple.
- Asooka 10y ago
  Sadly, if the company isn't profit-motivated, it will be displaced by a profit-motivated one. At this point large companies are eerily similar to the hypothetical paperclip-maximizing AI that converts the entire earth in paperclips. Except that making more money lets you make even more money in a snowball effect. The fix is probably to check glassdoor etc. as much as you can before working for a potentially unethical company. But then you'll be restricted to working for only a small handful of companies. The other fix is to only work as a contractor, so you're isolated from the effects of being practically a serf to a company entity.
  - escherize 10y ago
    Worker bees can leave. Even Drones can fly away. The queen is their slave.
ambicapter 10y ago
> that was acquired by a competitor who wanted to drive in the boot heel Why on earth would any company want to do that? Not doubting your story, looking for legitimate answers.
mistermann 10y ago
> these comments don't belong in the workplace. Indeed they don't, but then neither does preferential treatment due to cuteness, which I routinely observe. How society has become so fond of denying objective reality is very strange, especially when it doesn't seem to achieve much.

by sqldba 10y ago

provost 10y ago

> Apple was wrong. In Australia the law is clear and they've breached it. Take them to court and get your payout Is the OP in Australia?

dublinben 10y ago
The article is pretty clear that she was in the US. Not sure what Australian law has to do with this.

csydas 10y ago

> And this line stood out at me as being divorced from reality especially at a big company. I get it that we mostly want companies to be like this but I think it's also obvious that they're not. They are primarily profit motivated and we're lucky if they don't pollute the environment or commit atrocities in the process. You can look for smaller companies that do it, you can put it in your own company, but if you really felt Apple would be like that then it's being a little naive. I do not disagree that this is true, but I would suggest that this also is not an acceptable status quo. Complacency doesn't help it, and the unfortunate reality is that most companies just want to get into a battle of wills with those who are targets of harassment rather than take the time to address the issue as they should be. You are right that this seems to happen once you breach a certain threshold - I assume at that point legal gets more pre-emptive in its protection of the company and tries to divorce itself from the goings-on in Human Resource areas. Plus, as I said elsewhere in this discussion, finding and/or training managers to handle these issues in a fair way is not easy, nor is it easy to be the manager dealing with this situation. But I don't think that complacency is the answer, and she's not wrong that in many countries, the employer does have an obligation to handle the events. Attributing the sensations to it I'm not sure I fully agree with, but many countries do require investigative procedures, which according to the article weren't really performed well by management at Apple.

Asooka 10y ago
Sadly, if the company isn't profit-motivated, it will be displaced by a profit-motivated one. At this point large companies are eerily similar to the hypothetical paperclip-maximizing AI that converts the entire earth in paperclips. Except that making more money lets you make even more money in a snowball effect. The fix is probably to check glassdoor etc. as much as you can before working for a potentially unethical company. But then you'll be restricted to working for only a small handful of companies. The other fix is to only work as a contractor, so you're isolated from the effects of being practically a serf to a company entity.
- escherize 10y ago
  Worker bees can leave. Even Drones can fly away. The queen is their slave.

ambicapter 10y ago

> that was acquired by a competitor who wanted to drive in the boot heel Why on earth would any company want to do that? Not doubting your story, looking for legitimate answers.

mistermann 10y ago

> these comments don't belong in the workplace. Indeed they don't, but then neither does preferential treatment due to cuteness, which I routinely observe. How society has become so fond of denying objective reality is very strange, especially when it doesn't seem to achieve much.