Yet Another Lawsuit Against IBM for Racial Discrimination
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 вер 2024
- It's not the first (this follows a suit against Red Hat by a former employee, and a suit against IBM by the state of Missouri). And it probably won't be the last.
The article:
lunduke.locals...
More from The Lunduke Journal:
lunduke.com/
Discrimination against non-Whites will not be tolerated.
Discrimination against Whites is fine - as long as the discrimination is done in the name of non-discrimination.
From the perspective of the law, this is not true. And most judges will follow the law. Even those whose politics will disagree, most will put the law before politics.
The white male is at the bottom of the stack then the white female. They obviously do discriminate against white people; quite the hypocrites.
@@Omnifarious0 The law codifies 'the protected class'. IE, non-whites.
@@Omnifarious0 Sure, except for all the examples of them putting politics above the law.
@@wrongthinker843 - Most instances I've seen of that are in jurisdictions that are significantly skewed in one direction, and/or with cases involving some extremely divisive figures.
The Trump conviction and Elon Musk's pay lawsuit are the only two I can really think of.
Largest shareholders of IBM are Blackrock, Vanguard, State Street
Literally the founders of racism
98% of sv donations go to dnc.
Good. They'll be losing money, then.
Sv being silicone valley.
@@horusfalcon No, They make money on the loss - ANY change - the loss is the public. If the share price falls they sell (to themselves) take the loss and buy more. It is the Index funds (peoples savings) that take the hit.
IBM: _we're not racist!_
also IBM: *racist*
also IBM: Literally sold the equipment to facilitate the holocaust.
There's basically nothing IBM can do that would shock me.
I guess DEI activists think repeating enough times "it's not racist if it's against white people" will somehow make it true.
So weird that HR supported this stuff wholeheartedly. They're supposed to save the company from getting burned by legal issues, not direct the company into the oven.
You misunderstand their job. HR's only purpose is to find ways to legally enforce, hide, or dodge the legal ramifications of corporate policy. Regardless of the legality or merit of those policies.
HR is never your friend. Laws be damned.
@@muhdiversity7409 Exactly.
@@muhdiversity7409you're right - HR is never the *employee's* friend. But it *is* supposed to be the *company's* friend. The OP was right in that HR's sole function is to be the stop-gap to prevent the company from taking an action that will lead to a law suit. Like stopping them from discriminating against a protect class - race. Not encouraging the company to do just that.
There are state laws that mandate discrimination based on race (equity laws). It requires that companies have a specific share of different races and that all races are paid the same despite how well they perform
I hope they don't form a class. Multiple individual lawsuits will be more effective in curbing their behavior.
Just remember folks: IBM = Itty Bitty Minds
When will people start pointing out that only racist and hateful companies continue to do business with IBM at this point?
The hits just keep on coming!
i got laid off from Roche for being a while male. they paid me enough severance to not sue them.
Genentech in South San Francisco has publicly said they need to reduce their fraction of employees they identify as white males. They paid me 95k dollars to be racists and for me to not sue them for it. I took the money but I intend to sue them anyway.
Hope it lasts until you can find another job.
If you aren't in a 'protected group' your lawsuit won't go anywhere.
Race is a protect group. That includes white people.
I disagree. There will be a few judges who put their politics before the law, but not most of them. And most juries won't either.
@@Omnifarious0 Juries are a total roll of the dice, tons of ignorant and emotionally unstable voters out there and evne among those with a good head only a few have a truely coherent set of principles or a mind for long term strategy and consequences. (Juries being selected from the voter registration, and we see the average politicians they elect.)
@@cavalieroutdoors6036 It doesn't under law, it is made against them
Merrit is trickling out of our nation.
Good luck to Mr Dill. Somehow I doubt he will obtain "legal and equitable redress" in the banana republic of the US.
An unrealistic "Performance Improvement Plan"...? Hmmm..... Now I'm beginning to wonder, as that sounds VERY familiar.
If he wins his case and the tech trades attack his character he should sue them as well.
This kind of open discrimination cannot be tolerated on any level.
I think you should talk with Bret Weinstein about what's actually happening in the West. You're reporting on the symptoms, not the cause.
he is probably part of it, no "reporter" is this stupid
I am not from the US, wtf is going on over there
Same happens in Europe.
It's not being afraid of the employer that's really the issue, it's the fall-out. You come out against company X, whose else is going to touch you? Most company are now participating in some form of racist, or xenophobic hiring. They might not say it out loud, they might not write it down, but it's a fact that having lighter skin and male genitalia is going to hamper your movement, unless you fake being gay, trans or just invent something new so you get special status.
The other reality is that if you make a point of the illegal hiring practices, other companies won't risk hiring you, because you're associated. Maybe those companies aren't participating in the same BS, but that fact you made a statement makes you radioactive. If you want to test your company, and you have the ability to screen resumes, load the first round with while males and see what happens, if they don't bat an eye or hesitate, you're good to go.
In case anyone knows who I work for, they are one of the good guys, an absolute stand-up corporation, a small corporation, but a good one. Before they hired me, I went on several interviews where I was denied a job because I'm not a minority, and I'll leave it at that.
Sex not gender. English grammar has an answer to what gender is all about.
Yesyesyes, I thought I was the only one who still know that horses have a sex, not a gender.
It's especially funny that the ideology is so dishonest and stupid that the activists don't even understand it.
Genderist ideology is about social constructs ... horses and fishes don't have social constructs and they still use gender as a synonym for sex.
English was a mistake. In most languages like my language Swedish we dont have a word for gender. We use the same word for sex and gender because they are the same thing.
Hear, hear. Words have genders. People and animals have sexes.
Perhaps you refer to the neuter gender?
Look at the bright side, this problem will solve itself. Companies which do not hire the best people for the job will perform much less and will be forced to change it again and probably go bankrupt if they don't.
I hope they do go bankrupt. Boycott them...
It will not, because corporations are married with the government. It will end in bl0dshed.
Breaks my heart that the REG went woke.
Did they really? If this is true it makes me sad.