> I worry that this is just messaging to build towards 'make DEI jobs immune from layoffs' A job that's immune to layoffs, sign me up! /s Seriously however, i

> I worry that this is just messaging to build towards 'make DEI jobs immune from layoffs' A job that's immune to layoffs, sign me up! /s Seriously however, it seems to me that DEI positions are mainly about virtue signaling. The positions certainly don't have anything to do with a companies core competencies or products (you know, their actual business). So it's pure overhead. Wasn't this stuff traditionally handled by HR? As other's have pointed out, there are already laws on the books that must be followed, and plenty of precedent showing large $$$ payouts when the rules aren't being followed. If/when jobs like this become mandatory, then a new bureaucracy will emerge and spread like a cancer, the overhead hanging like a millstone around a companies ability to stay competitive. You're seeing this happen on universities, where the staff/student ratio continues to grow, raising tuition and reducing the value of the education. I worry about the future competitive value American companies will bring to the global economy.