12 ms·

I understand that it can happen for highly-ranking people , who are also public persons and speak for the company. However, I don't understand policies like the

by return0 11y ago

I understand that it can happen for highly-ranking people , who are also public persons and speak for the company. However, I don't understand policies like the one that reddit recently established, that programmers who get hired must "commit to diversity". This looks a lot like the holy inquisition, it has nothing to do with their expected job performance. You either "think this way" or get fired. I thought it took all sorts to make a world.

dragonwriter 11y ago
> This looks a lot like the holy inquisition It looks like a loyalty oath, to be sure, but, while one might argue those are undesirable, comparisons with the Holy Inquisition (whether by that one intends the Spanish Inquisition or the Roman Inquisition)...well, to borrow from Pulp Fiction, it ain't the same f-in ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same damn sport. > either "think this way" or get fired. I think you are confusing "thinking this way" with "commit to act this way". Two different things. > I thought it took all sorts to make a world. Presuming that's perceived as important to the mission of a firm, why would it be unacceptable for a firm to expect employees to commit to act based on that as a condition of employment?
- return0 11y ago
  > why would it be unacceptable It's not unacceptable, just weird. Many people may not agree that diversity should supercede meritocracy in a company.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > Many people may not agree that diversity should supercede meritocracy in a company. If the diversity is viewed by the decision-makers of the company as part of the mission, than actions consistent with it are part of merit in the context of employment with the company. "Merit" isn't a freestanding thing unrelated to the context of employment, it is meaningful only in regard to what the company is hoping to achieve by paying you.

by return0 11y ago

dragonwriter 11y ago

> This looks a lot like the holy inquisition It looks like a loyalty oath, to be sure, but, while one might argue those are undesirable, comparisons with the Holy Inquisition (whether by that one intends the Spanish Inquisition or the Roman Inquisition)...well, to borrow from Pulp Fiction, it ain't the same f-in ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same damn sport. > either "think this way" or get fired. I think you are confusing "thinking this way" with "commit to act this way". Two different things. > I thought it took all sorts to make a world. Presuming that's perceived as important to the mission of a firm, why would it be unacceptable for a firm to expect employees to commit to act based on that as a condition of employment?

return0 11y ago
> why would it be unacceptable It's not unacceptable, just weird. Many people may not agree that diversity should supercede meritocracy in a company.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Many people may not agree that diversity should supercede meritocracy in a company. If the diversity is viewed by the decision-makers of the company as part of the mission, than actions consistent with it are part of merit in the context of employment with the company. "Merit" isn't a freestanding thing unrelated to the context of employment, it is meaningful only in regard to what the company is hoping to achieve by paying you.