4 ms·

This link might help explain things: https://www.scarsdaleschools.k12.ny.us/cms/lib5/NY01001205/Centricity/Domain/379/De%20Facto%20vs.%20De%20Jure%20Discrimina

This link might help explain things: https://www.scarsdaleschools.k12.ny.us/cms/lib5/NY01001205/Centricity/Domain/379/De%20Facto%20vs.%20De%20Jure%20Discrimination.pdf https://www.scarsdaleschools.k12.ny.us/cms/lib5/NY01001205/C... I think "racist/sexist" may be muddying the waters a little bit since they are not narrowly defined and probably have more implication of motive, but de facto discrimination is a well recognized concept and it is illegal.

Udik 6y ago
"De facto" as opposed to "de jure" means something happening without being mandated by law. This doesn't seem to have much to do with the GP's statement: >> If the firings disproportionately or systemically impact races or genders, the firings can be racist/sexist -- even if race or gender is not involved in the firing decision. If race or gender are not involved in the firing decisions, it means that the decision is based on other factors. If some male workers declare an illegal strike because they think they're discriminated, and they are fired as a consequence, this has nothing to do with their gender, but with the illegal strike. If people imprisoned for religious terrorism are all religious, this doesn't mean religious people are discriminated, but that terrorists are imprisoned. Etc.
- Pfhreak 6y ago
  > If race or gender are not involved in the firing decisions, it means that the decision is based on other factors. Or it means that race/gender were involved due to implicit biases or systems beyond what the firing party believed they were evaluating. One can unintentionally have discriminatory behavior. It might not have been a factor in the discussions of the firings, but it still could be a root cause.
  - Udik 6y ago
    > It might not have been a factor in the discussions of the firings, but it still could be a root cause. In which case it was a factor.
  - orestarod 6y ago
    When evaluating a specific matter through specific factors, do you really then have to go through all the other possible factors to make sure they are equally represented in the outcome?

Udik 6y ago

"De facto" as opposed to "de jure" means something happening without being mandated by law. This doesn't seem to have much to do with the GP's statement: >> If the firings disproportionately or systemically impact races or genders, the firings can be racist/sexist -- even if race or gender is not involved in the firing decision. If race or gender are not involved in the firing decisions, it means that the decision is based on other factors. If some male workers declare an illegal strike because they think they're discriminated, and they are fired as a consequence, this has nothing to do with their gender, but with the illegal strike. If people imprisoned for religious terrorism are all religious, this doesn't mean religious people are discriminated, but that terrorists are imprisoned. Etc.

Pfhreak 6y ago
> If race or gender are not involved in the firing decisions, it means that the decision is based on other factors. Or it means that race/gender were involved due to implicit biases or systems beyond what the firing party believed they were evaluating. One can unintentionally have discriminatory behavior. It might not have been a factor in the discussions of the firings, but it still could be a root cause.
- Udik 6y ago
  > It might not have been a factor in the discussions of the firings, but it still could be a root cause. In which case it was a factor.
- orestarod 6y ago
  When evaluating a specific matter through specific factors, do you really then have to go through all the other possible factors to make sure they are equally represented in the outcome?