4 ms·

I too work in one of these "progressive" workplaces. On political / social matters, I sometimes have an opinion that differs from the one that the company (very

I too work in one of these "progressive" workplaces. On political / social matters, I sometimes have an opinion that differs from the one that the company (very vocally) advertises. People holding the majority view are publicly cheered by the company, but people holding minority views are (at best) tolerated. This frustrates me on several levels: - There's no room for debate on these topics. The official company position is treated as so obviously correct that a reasoned debate on the matters is treated as unnecessary, or even worse, immoral. I find this insulting. - The company / majority position seems to be self-contradictory. E.g., they promote LGBTQ behavior as praiseworthy, which implies that certain religions' teachings about sexual ethics are factually incorrect. But the company also claims to respect people's religious choices. These leave me with the impression that the employer is hypocritical and/or disingenuous.

helen___keller 7y ago
> People holding the majority view are publicly cheered by the company, but people holding minority views are (at best) tolerated May I have a specific example? There appears to be a lot of negative opinions about this kind of workplace based on the comments (and my downvotes on some of my comments haha). I'm just trying to understand it. If you're curious, you can see a specific example from my workplace in the edit region here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21524930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21524930 I've never personally had a bad experience from being in a "progressive" workplace. I don't agree with them on everything, but in general I've never had a bad experience. The "social justice" aspect is pretty opt-in, so I don't know what could lead to a negative experience such as being less than tolerated. > The company / majority position seems to be self-contradictory. E.g., they promote LGBTQ behavior as praiseworthy, which implies that certain religions' teachings about sexual ethics are factually incorrect. But the company also claims to respect people's religious choices. I don't really see the contradiction. My work celebrates employees by giving us catered lunches that often include pork but nobody perceives that as being anti-muslim, as long as there are non-pork choices. The vegetarians and vegans don't mind meat on the table as long as there are vegetarian and vegan choices. A subset of teachings from a subset of Christian faiths will say something like "[homosexuality] is an abomination". It would be disrespectful to employee's religion (and common sense) for the employer to tell their employees they must be homosexual. It is not disrespectful for the employer to celebrate other employees who are homosexual. Am I misunderstanding?
- DoofusOfDeath 7y ago
  Thanks for the substantive discussion! > May I have a specific example? I can't without giving out too much detail. I shouldn't have stated that without being able to provide substance, sorry. > It is not disrespectful for the employer to celebrate other employees who are homosexual. Am I misunderstanding? I think we're getting close to the fundamental issue here. Let me unpack my logic a bit: 1) Celebrating behavior X implies that X is in some way virtuous. 2) To claim that X is virtuous, is to claim that any belief system S which states X is not virtuous is in error. So I see the current discussion as having the structure shown above, with: X = partaking in a homosexual relationship, and S = the theologies of various Christian, Muslim, and Jewish sects. So in short, it seems to me that employers are logically implying that certain employees have false religious beliefs, but the employers are hiding behind the fact that the their implication isn't clearly stated. I think that's inconsistent with the employers' claims to respect employees' religious views.
  - helen___keller 7y ago
    I can agree with your logic, in particular with one additional axiom: 3) an employer can respect employees religious views only if they will not imply the religious view is in error It's clearly (from your logic) the case that employers description of "respects" violates axiom (3). If you belong to one of the sects in question I can understand being upset, but I would argue that (given the breadth of beliefs in the world) it is impossible to not imply some employees "respected" belief is wrong. So perhaps this is the point, that employers should not claim to respect beliefs because they necessarily must act inconsistently while doing so. Thus, one might conclude, a workplace should stand for nothing in particular and thus allow employees to believe anything without celebrating or respecting it. However, I wouldn't agree with this conclusion. I would rather that my employers tries the best possible at the (futile) task of being respectful and celebratory to all, and if problems are raised they try to be concluded with minimal conflict and maximum respect. In fact, I'd claim this the common sense approach. This is how I resolve having friends with non-identical belief sets, for example. (An example: one coworker made a joke to the expense of astrology. A different coworker chimed in that she and others adhered to astrology and found this joke offensive. The original coworker offered an apology and all was well.)
ZeroGravitas 7y ago
If a company claims to support multiple religious choices, isn't it inevitable that some of those will conflict? They can probably avoid the more metaphysical questions but as soon as they have a canteen there's going to be issues if any group assumes their religious rules must be applied to everyone's food (and indeed what they're eating outside of work).

helen___keller 7y ago

> People holding the majority view are publicly cheered by the company, but people holding minority views are (at best) tolerated May I have a specific example? There appears to be a lot of negative opinions about this kind of workplace based on the comments (and my downvotes on some of my comments haha). I'm just trying to understand it. If you're curious, you can see a specific example from my workplace in the edit region here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21524930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21524930 I've never personally had a bad experience from being in a "progressive" workplace. I don't agree with them on everything, but in general I've never had a bad experience. The "social justice" aspect is pretty opt-in, so I don't know what could lead to a negative experience such as being less than tolerated. > The company / majority position seems to be self-contradictory. E.g., they promote LGBTQ behavior as praiseworthy, which implies that certain religions' teachings about sexual ethics are factually incorrect. But the company also claims to respect people's religious choices. I don't really see the contradiction. My work celebrates employees by giving us catered lunches that often include pork but nobody perceives that as being anti-muslim, as long as there are non-pork choices. The vegetarians and vegans don't mind meat on the table as long as there are vegetarian and vegan choices. A subset of teachings from a subset of Christian faiths will say something like "[homosexuality] is an abomination". It would be disrespectful to employee's religion (and common sense) for the employer to tell their employees they must be homosexual. It is not disrespectful for the employer to celebrate other employees who are homosexual. Am I misunderstanding?

DoofusOfDeath 7y ago
Thanks for the substantive discussion! > May I have a specific example? I can't without giving out too much detail. I shouldn't have stated that without being able to provide substance, sorry. > It is not disrespectful for the employer to celebrate other employees who are homosexual. Am I misunderstanding? I think we're getting close to the fundamental issue here. Let me unpack my logic a bit: 1) Celebrating behavior X implies that X is in some way virtuous. 2) To claim that X is virtuous, is to claim that any belief system S which states X is not virtuous is in error. So I see the current discussion as having the structure shown above, with: X = partaking in a homosexual relationship, and S = the theologies of various Christian, Muslim, and Jewish sects. So in short, it seems to me that employers are logically implying that certain employees have false religious beliefs, but the employers are hiding behind the fact that the their implication isn't clearly stated. I think that's inconsistent with the employers' claims to respect employees' religious views.
- helen___keller 7y ago
  I can agree with your logic, in particular with one additional axiom: 3) an employer can respect employees religious views only if they will not imply the religious view is in error It's clearly (from your logic) the case that employers description of "respects" violates axiom (3). If you belong to one of the sects in question I can understand being upset, but I would argue that (given the breadth of beliefs in the world) it is impossible to not imply some employees "respected" belief is wrong. So perhaps this is the point, that employers should not claim to respect beliefs because they necessarily must act inconsistently while doing so. Thus, one might conclude, a workplace should stand for nothing in particular and thus allow employees to believe anything without celebrating or respecting it. However, I wouldn't agree with this conclusion. I would rather that my employers tries the best possible at the (futile) task of being respectful and celebratory to all, and if problems are raised they try to be concluded with minimal conflict and maximum respect. In fact, I'd claim this the common sense approach. This is how I resolve having friends with non-identical belief sets, for example. (An example: one coworker made a joke to the expense of astrology. A different coworker chimed in that she and others adhered to astrology and found this joke offensive. The original coworker offered an apology and all was well.)

ZeroGravitas 7y ago

If a company claims to support multiple religious choices, isn't it inevitable that some of those will conflict? They can probably avoid the more metaphysical questions but as soon as they have a canteen there's going to be issues if any group assumes their religious rules must be applied to everyone's food (and indeed what they're eating outside of work).