3 ms·

Assuming this is your motive you wouldn't put a token diversity hire in charge of the thing that drives your revenue. You would put them in a bullshit job that

Assuming this is your motive you wouldn't put a token diversity hire in charge of the thing that drives your revenue. You would put them in a bullshit job that had no impact on your top or bottom lines.

jacquesm 5y ago
According to the article that's exactly what they did. Nominally in charge but actually completely ignored, she was quite literally hired as a figurehead due to her pedigree, not because of her capabilities.
a4isms 5y ago
It’s not an either-or, she describes her female colleagues in other positions saying the same thing. In this case, Rivian got to brag that they poached a well-respected executive with experience managing sales for a small but high-status brand. This assured investors, lenders, and the market for their IPO that they’re “growing up” and “scaling for success.” Meanwhile, they got to do whatever they felt like doing with the investment money, because they had zero intention of doing anything said executive proposed. Given sufficiently sexist and misogynist executives, hiring a woman for a role they had no intention of empowering makes even more sense than hiring a man, because misogynists would respect a man and feel bad about marginalizing them.
- greenail 5y ago
  Sure, this is possible but based on her experience she should already be good at navigating in male dominated auto environments based on her career. The lack of details and the cynic in me tells me that if she was at-will and was fired the only way she can sue is by claiming title VII discrimination. Timing wise it also helps that they have the IPO looming. I'd love to read the actual case filing but I can't find it. If she's right I hope she wins but based on the article I am highly skeptical.
  - a4isms 5y ago
    I will summarize your reply as: 1. If it happened the way she says it happened, it’s her fault. She ought to have known how to deal with this. 2. Alternatively, she’s a lying, scheming, conniving woman. I have nothing else to say to you.

jacquesm 5y ago

According to the article that's exactly what they did. Nominally in charge but actually completely ignored, she was quite literally hired as a figurehead due to her pedigree, not because of her capabilities.

a4isms 5y ago

It’s not an either-or, she describes her female colleagues in other positions saying the same thing. In this case, Rivian got to brag that they poached a well-respected executive with experience managing sales for a small but high-status brand. This assured investors, lenders, and the market for their IPO that they’re “growing up” and “scaling for success.” Meanwhile, they got to do whatever they felt like doing with the investment money, because they had zero intention of doing anything said executive proposed. Given sufficiently sexist and misogynist executives, hiring a woman for a role they had no intention of empowering makes even more sense than hiring a man, because misogynists would respect a man and feel bad about marginalizing them.

greenail 5y ago
Sure, this is possible but based on her experience she should already be good at navigating in male dominated auto environments based on her career. The lack of details and the cynic in me tells me that if she was at-will and was fired the only way she can sue is by claiming title VII discrimination. Timing wise it also helps that they have the IPO looming. I'd love to read the actual case filing but I can't find it. If she's right I hope she wins but based on the article I am highly skeptical.
- a4isms 5y ago
  I will summarize your reply as: 1. If it happened the way she says it happened, it’s her fault. She ought to have known how to deal with this. 2. Alternatively, she’s a lying, scheming, conniving woman. I have nothing else to say to you.