3 ms·
But allowing it, in the first place, is also no legally sound: https://medium.com/@scurphey/googles-response-to-employee-s-anti-diversity-manifesto-ignores-wor
by snotrockets 9y ago
But allowing it, in the first place, is also no legally sound: https://medium.com/@scurphey/googles-response-to-employee-s-anti-diversity-manifesto-ignores-workplace-discrimination-law-97c7c729cf86 https://medium.com/@scurphey/googles-response-to-employee-s-...
- TazeTSchnitzel 9y agoClearly, Google must neither fire nor not fire the employee.
- snotrockets 9y agoNo, they must fire him. As long as Google don't act, they are complicit; very few would believe their recruiters when they'll talk about D&I, yet keep such bigots on the payroll. It's just going to cost them more to fire him now that the trashfire is blowing full. They have nobody to blame but their own selves.
- bassman9000 9y agoComplicit of what? Wrongthink?
- TazeTSchnitzel 9y agoComplicit in creating a toxic work environment where women feel their abilities are under constant suspicion and they are not valued as team members.
- snotrockets 9y agoIf there's anything he can't be blamed for is thinking. If he did more of that, he wouldn't be where he is.