"The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against The New York Times on Tuesday..."

"... claiming that the paper had engaged in 'unlawful employment practices' and had discriminated against a white male employee who did not get a sought-after promotion.... The complaint quotes from Times diversity and inclusion reports in recent years, including a 2021 'Call to Action' that set a goal of increasing the number of Black and Latino employees. The reports 'detailed N.Y.T.’s express efforts to make employment decisions on the basis of race and sex to achieve its desired demographic goals,' the complaint says. 'A decrease in the percentage of White male employees (whether new hires, existing employees or those in leadership, as appropriate) was a necessary consequence for the N.Y.T. to achieve these results.'..."

The New York Times examines litigation brought against it, in "U.S. Sues The New York Times, Claiming Discrimination Against a White Man/The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said the paper had engaged in 'unlawful employment practices' against the man, who did not get a sought-after promotion."

"According to the complaint, the complainant was interviewed for the job but was not selected for a panel interview. 'The four candidates advanced to the panel interview stage matched the race and/or sex characteristics N.Y.T. sought to increase in its leadership,' the complaint says. According to the complaint, the final pool of candidates consisted of 'a white woman, a Black man, an Asian female and a multiracial female.'..."

What do you think is more likely?

There was something wrong with that one white male employee who didn't advance to the panel interview.

That one man exemplifies how many white men have fared at the NYT and elsewhere over the years.

 

pollcode.com free polls

"The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously ruled in favor of a straight woman who twice lost positions to gay workers..."

"... saying an appeals court had been wrong to require her to meet a heightened burden in seeking to prove workplace discrimination because she was a member of a majority group."

The NYT reports.

The standards for proving workplace discrimination under a federal civil rights law, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote for the court, “does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a member of a majority group.”...

The text of the law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, does not draw distinctions based on whether the person claiming discrimination is a member of a majority group. But some courts have required plaintiffs from majority groups to prove an additional element if they lack direct evidence of discrimination: “background circumstances that support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.”

It's not that unusual!

"If she wins, the flood of reverse discrimination claims will be like nothing we’ve ever seen. Straight, White people everywhere could be filing."

Said Johnny C. Taylor Jr., chief executive of the human resources association SHRM.

Quoted in "Her claim of anti-straight bias could upend discrimination law/The Supreme Court will hear a case that could unleash a wave of workplace bias claims by Whites, men and people who are straight" (WaPo).

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Wednesday in [Marlean] Ames’s bid to revive her case, which was stymied in the lower courts because of past rulings that set a higher legal bar for men, straight people and Whites to prove bias in the workplace than for groups that have historically faced discrimination. That higher standard is unconstitutional, her suit says.... 

Some worry a ruling for Ames could chill workplace diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs at a moment when President Donald Trump has made it a priority to roll back such initiatives across the country and squash “anti-White feeling.”

I went to that internal link and didn't see the phrase "anti-White feeling." Why is that in quotes? I can only infer that Trump said it, but it's odd to put it in quotes — and odd to capitalize "White" and to use the verb "squash" here. You know, I stick closely to mainstream news reports, especially The NYT and The Washington Post, and I believe I'm seeing an abrupt decline in quality, and it feels like an effort to get Trump.

Wow. Whose side is Andrew Cuomo on? Or is the point so clear, it doesn't matter? Or he's laying the groundwork for 2028?

BREAKING: The former Democrat Governor of New York just admitted live on air that the Trump case would've never been brought if Trump wasn't running for President

"I'm telling you, that case would have never been brought. And that's what's offensive to people. And it should be."… pic.twitter.com/KHrq7asKNh

— George (@BehizyTweets) June 22, 2024

What I hear him saying between the lines: I was the one with good sense, and you made me cede the ground to these clowns. Look what they've done. Don't you miss me?

Elon Musk makes a big move to fund anti-DEI litigation against Disney, ABC, ESPN, and Marvel.

If you were discriminated against by Disney or its subsidiaries (ABC, ESPN, Marvel, etc), just reply to this post to receive legal support https://t.co/PDqCgJKAY5

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 6, 2024

"A corporate law firm that was accused of racial discrimination for offering a diversity fellowship to law students of underrepresented groups has opened its program..."

"... to students of all races, according to a change on its website. A few weeks earlier, Morrison Foerster, based in San Francisco, was sued for excluding nonminority students from the program. The lawsuit was brought by the American Alliance for Equal Rights (AAER), founded by conservative activist Edward Blum, who was behind the cases that culminated in the Supreme Court striking down affirmative action in college admissions. Now his groups are among those launching a broader campaign to dismantle diversity initiatives in the private sector...."

WaPo reports.

"In job postings and public statements over several years, SpaceX wrongly claimed that under federal regulations known as 'export control laws'..."

"... SpaceX could hire only U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, sometimes referred to as 'green card holders.' Export control laws impose no such hiring restrictions. Moreover, asylees’ and refugees’ permission to live and work in the United States does not expire, and they stand on equal footing with U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents under export control laws...."

From a Justice Department press release, "Justice Department Sues SpaceX for Discriminating Against Asylees and Refugees in Hiring."

Musk's reply:

"The world Lizzo has built around herself is essentially a cult: it’s dependent on everyone thinking the same extreme, bizarre, contradictory things as she does."

"You find it a lot nowadays: in the arts; politics, obviously; even in banks, for God’s sake. People rush to reinforce warped thought systems, like the pathetic Beyoncé, who has constantly sucked up to Lizzo, chasing the fat dollar. Until last week, of course, when the allegations came out, and then it was as if Lizzo had died: no regular shout-out from Beyoncé on her tour any more."

Writes Camilla Long, in "If you sign up to work in the seedy world of Lizzo, you must expect some XXXL lunacy" (London Times).

"Russian soprano Anna Netrebko, one of opera’s biggest stars, sued the Metropolitan Opera... alleging discrimination when the company dropped her after Russia invaded Ukraine."

"The suit... includes claims of national origin discrimination, breach of contract and defamation.... Met general manager Peter Gelb said at the time she 'is one of the greatest singers in Met history, but with Putin killing innocent victims in Ukraine, there was no way forward.' Netrebko had made several statements opposing the war and violence at the time of her ouster, but did not agree to Gelb’s request that she specifically condemn Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to her suit..."

WaPo reports.

"Usually I choose not to respond to false allegations but these are as unbelievable as they sound and too outrageous to not be addressed."

"These sensationalized stories are coming from former employees who have already publicly admitted that they were told their behavior on tour was inappropriate and unprofessional.... I am very open with my sexuality and expressing myself but I cannot accept or allow people to use that openness to make me out to be something I am not.... There is nothing I take more seriously than the respect we deserve as women in the world. I know what it feels like to be body shamed on a daily basis and would absolutely never criticize or terminate an employee because of their weight."

Said Lizzo on Instagram, quoted in "Lizzo Denies Allegations in Former Dancers’ Lawsuit/Three dancers have accused the Grammy-winning singer of creating a hostile work environment, claims that she said were 'as unbelievable as they sound'" (NYT).

For the annals of servitude.

1. "2 Wisconsin Republicans want 14-year-olds to be allowed to serve alcohol in restaurants" (Insider). There's currently a labor shortage, and the bill would only allow the 14-17-year olds to serve alcohol to those who are seated at tables, not those at the bar. Oddly enough, in Wisconsin, underage kids can drink alcohol, even at the bar, if they're with a parent! Anyway, 14-17-year olds already work in restaurants and wait on tables. To let them deliver the drinks to the table would simply enable them to do all the ordinary tasks that are part of the job. What are we afraid of? Child labor? But they're already waiting on the tables. That they might, if entrusted with a small tray of drinks, surreptitiously sip on one? It can't be that we feel a need to protect them from a drinking environment, because they are already working in restaurants. They already see people imbibing. It's not as though we're letting them see an orgy.

2. "Black waiter forced to serve N-word spewing diners decked in Confederate flags: report" (Raw Story). As one server tells it: "A party full of people wearing Confederate flag gear just tried to f---ing come eat in our restaurant. One of our Black servers had to take them.... They’re N-word this, N-word that, while he’s there at the table. They’re not even trying to stop." The black man who waited on the table said that it was a reservation for 11, and he'd started working on the table after only a few had showed up, "including a baby wrapped in a Confederate coat," but he didn't really notice until more arrived. Then, the managers asked if he had "any issues with this table," and he continued until someone addressed him as "boy." He "couldn't return to the table, after which the group demanded the managers force him to return and correct their orders." We're told the "managers tried to defuse the situation," but "he's considering a lawsuit," presumably against his employer. ADDED: Assuming the accuracy of this account, I think the managers ought to have told the customers they had to leave. It shouldn't have depended on the server's declaring an inability to soldier on.

"If diversity trainings have no impact whatsoever, that would mean that perhaps billions of dollars are being wasted annually.... But there’s a darker possibility..."

"... Some diversity initiatives might actually worsen the D.E.I. climates of the organizations that pay for them. That’s partly because any psychological intervention may turn out to do more harm than good. The late psychologist Scott Lilienfeld made this point in an influential 2007 article where he argued that certain interventions — including ones geared at fighting youth substance use, youth delinquency and PTSD — likely fell into that category. In the case of D.E.I., Dr. Dobbin and Dr. Kalev warn that diversity trainings that are mandatory, or that threaten dominant groups’ sense of belonging or make them feel blamed, may elicit negative backlash or exacerbate pre-existing biases.... The history of diversity trainings is, in a sense, a history of fads. Maybe the current crop will wither over time, new ones will sprout that are stunted by the same lack of evidence, and a decade from now someone else will write a version of this article. But it’s also possible that organizations will grow tired of throwing time and money at trainings where the upside is mostly theoretical...."

Writes Jesse Singal in "What if Diversity Trainings Are Doing More Harm Than Good?" (NYT).

No comments section over there. I'll just imagine the evisceration that would have taken place. Singal complains about the lack of science but offers no competing science other than the non-news that hearing about white supremacy hurts white people's feelings and might lead to more white supremacy. Every fix might backfire, so why try to fix anything? But how do you know that's not white supremacy talking?

Which half of your employees would you keep? How would you weigh the sleeps-in-the-office factor? Not catnapping, but sleeping overnight on the floor?

 

Link. 

Esther Crawford's Twitter profile says: "early stage products @twitter. previously ceo @squad (acq'd by @twitter in 2020 which was acq’d by @elonmusk in 2022). raising 3 humans w/ @bobcowherd." 

Background: "Elon Musk to Lay Off About 3,700 Twitter Employees on Friday: Report" (Gizmodo):

"In case you're wondering, as I did, how my punishment for tweeting about Toobin compares to Toobin's suspension for his offense...."

"He was off air for eight months; I was off for seven. One month was the difference between punishment for jacking off at work versus commenting on the inadvisability of jacking off at work. On one hand, the people who made this call about me are gone from the network, so maybe I could let it lie. But on the other hand, many of my colleagues no doubt knew about my banning from air, but not the reasons behind it, thereby leaving the impression I must have done something tantamount to Toobining. I did not. I was told it was Jeff Zucker, now gone, who put this order in place and a deputy, also gone, who kept it there. I was also told I wasn't informed of the network's displeasure because I had just had a baby and someone in the old leadership thought I might be a 'loose cannon.' Not as loose as Toobin's.... In the #MeToo era, I have been asked to make public comment on basically every errant penis in the media, government, sports, and entertainment worlds, sometimes to the exclusion of everything else in the news, and at the expense of some amount of professional dignity. It is ironic that in shining a light on bad behavior, which is the right thing to do, you're still a woman on TV talking about penises...."

Writes Mary Katharine Ham, in "In the Age of Quiet Quitting, I Was Quiet Suspended, And I Can't Shut Up About It/On Toobin's wake, professionalism, and the lessons I thought we learned in #MeToo" (Substack).

"What do you do when neither spouse is happy with the working and income-generating grind?"

"My husband and I had an agreement that when each of our children were born, I would take my maternity leave and then he would take a leave of similar length when I returned to work. We are finding now, after the arrival of our second baby, that neither of us wants to go back. I earn more money, and thus I have to return to work, but I am equally unhappy with the weekly grind...."

From a letter to the WaPo advice columnist.

This shows that the perverse privilege inherent in systematically paying women less. It preserves the traditional structure of man out in the world, woman in the home.

What can you say to this woman except welcome to reality? Well, I'd say that it doesn't have to be the higher earner who goes to work. Who has the more satisfying job? Who has the job that makes a greater contribution to the world? Maybe at some point, you'll hit upon the factors that let the wife have her wish of avoiding the difficulties of work.

Also, consider that you might also not be happy with the childcare "grind." It's all grind when you have a bad attitude, isn't it?

"A Kentucky man who was fired days after he had a panic attack at his workplace over an unwanted birthday party was awarded $450,000 by a jury last month..."

"... or lost wages and emotional distress. The man, Kevin Berling, had been working at a medical laboratory, Gravity Diagnostics in Covington, Ky., for about 10 months when he asked the office manager not to throw him a birthday party because he had an anxiety disorder, according to a lawsuit filed in Kentucky’s Kenton County Circuit Court.... Mr. Berling had a panic attack after he learned about the planned lunchtime celebration, which was to have included birthday wishes from colleagues and a banner decorating the break room. Mr. Berling chose to spend his lunch break in his car instead. The next day, Mr. Berling had a panic attack in a meeting with two supervisors who confronted him about his 'somber behavior,' Mr. Bucher said. He was fired three days later in an email that suggested that Mr. Berling posed a threat to his co-workers’ safety...."

The NYT reports.

The legal claim was discrimination based on disability. The company's legal position seems to be both that it wasn't informed of Berling's disorder and that the condition was not a disability within the meaning of the law.

What should you do if you have an anxiety disorder and risk getting triggered by workplace interactions?

"Racism, dead penguins and retaliation: Why the Vilas Zoo lost its only Black zookeepers."

That's the headline for a Madison.com article about the zoo here in Madison. You might think racism is somehow killing penguins — those birds who might seem to embody the peaceful harmonization of black and white.

There were 2 black zookeepers, and each left to take a job at a zoo in another city. But their exit interviews contained some criticisms, including some things about the treatment of animals, most notably the decapitation death of a penguin. Who would decapitate a penguin?! A raccoon. Wild local raccoons take the liberty to come and go as they please, including slipping into the enclosures of captive animals. 

We're told that, according to an exit interview, the zoo's general curator, Beth Petersen "decided to stop trapping raccoons that got onto zoo property and instead put Epsom salts on the ground in an attempt to repel them." At least one raccoon was insufficiently repelled, got into the penguin exhibit, and bit the head off Alice, the "elderly African penguin."

"I don’t think many on the left are actually super enthusiastic about these diversity trainings, but the general sense is also that only a bitter crank would actually complain about them."

"But there is real evidence that they are at least sometimes making things worse, which strikes me as a big deal. For example, Michelle Duguid and Melissa Thomas-Hunt find that when you tell people that stereotyping is widespread, they stereotype more. This suggests to me that a very underrated step toward progress would be to eliminate the judicial and legal standards that suggest diversity training has litigation-protective effects...."

From "How to be an anti-racist/Diversity training doesn't work — here's some stuff that does" by Matt Yglesias (Slow Boring).

"A trans woman who transitioned late, in her fifties for example, who benefited from being treated as a man and paid as a man throughout her career, could really skew the figures."

"It makes the data inherently unreliable. It is unsafe as a matter of principle. The idea behind the sex pay gap is to identify systemic sex-based discrimination and rectify it. That’s the idea. It’s to right the historical wrong of women being underpaid."

Said the barrister Akua Reindorf, quoted in "Biggest firms won’t record sex of bosses under diversity plans/Identifying as a woman is enough in proposals from regulator ‘captured by Stonewall'" (London Times).

Stonewall is an LGBTQ group that wants "woman" defined to include anyone who identifies as a woman and to require companies to make statements about the number of women in their leadership positions. Reindorf is pointing out a conflict between transgender goals and traditional feminist goals. 

"The lack of women in tech is a complicated problem. Attacking or ignoring one book written by a misogynist won’t solve it."

"However, rejecting the book as a typical narrative of our industry might be a good start. The book tells the story of an uninspiring, morally questionable individual in tech, who stands out only for the way he disparages people of minorities. It’s not 'a guide to the spirit of Silicon Valley' as the author and his publisher try to present. Men don’t have to be like the author, and women don’t have to work with, even tolerate, men like the author to fit into the tech world." 

Wrote Chip Huyen, a writer and computer scientist, in "A simple reason why there aren't more women in tech - we're okay with misogyny" (at her own blog). She wrote that 2 years ago, criticizing Antonio García Martínez for his memoir, "Chaos Monkeys: Obscene Fortune and Random Failure in Silicon Valley." It was March 2019, and García Martínez had just been hired to write at Wired. Huyen wanted people to know that he'd displayed himself as an out-and-proud sexist. 

Huyen quoted this passage from the book:

“Most women in the Bay Area are soft and weak, cosseted and naive despite their claims of worldliness, and generally full of shit. They have their self-regarding entitlement feminism, and ceaselessly vaunt their independence, but the reality is, come the epidemic plague or foreign invasion, they’d become precisely the sort of useless baggage you’d trade for a box of shotgun shells or a jerry can of diesel.”

I was reading that because I was sent there by Axios, in a new article, "Apple parts ways with employee amid backlash." García Martínez had moved on to a job at Apple, and some employees there put together a petition, stating "We demand an investigation into how his published views on women and people of color were missed or ignored, along with a clear plan of action to prevent this from happening again."