This kind of discrimination could be excused if it brought a tangible value to the company, but this reshuffling did nothing to help this ailing company.
Meyer's actions were discriminatory at worst; at best, it was merely gross incompetence.
Lots of companies fail to survive Silicon Valley forever. Yahoo!'s future aside, the conversation was about promotion, not ailing companies.
A lot of women are routinely overlooked in management promotions. Since its 80% (or usually much more) men in every other company in Silicon Valley, we'll have to call discrimination and incompetence at all of them?
The assumption that women can't possibly belong in management is galling. No mystery why Silicon Valley has the reputation it does.
>The assumption that women can't possibly belong in management is galling. No mystery why Silicon Valley has the reputation it does.
You're putting a lot of words in other people's mouths in this thread, and I believe you are equating skepticism and discomfort from the lawsuit's allegations with willful ignorance or even sincere sexism.
If a CEO wishes to fire half the company and hire new people, sure. If the CEO wants to fire half the company (who happen to be men) and replace them with new people (who happen to be women), again, sure.
If a CEO implements a review system designed to illegitimize honest work by a cohort of people and have them demoted and/or fired to minimize severance costs while bringing on or promoting people of a different cohort, then we have a discrimination problem.
Honestly I am a little surprised at the accusations of sexism towards people that are expressing discomfort with what appears to be a primarily sexist act.
One of the things that has been only lightly touched upon:
> ... and have them demoted and/or fired to minimize severance costs ...
Tangential to this was the violation of the California and federal WARN act. Yahoo reduced the workforce by 600 employees without declaring the corresponding reduction in force under WARN acts.
If a company has 100 (federal) or 75 (California) or more full time employees that have been employed for 6 of the past 12 months and lays off 50 or more employees during a 30 day period, the employer falls into the WARN act.
Yes -- because people go to tech websites and spam entire comment sections with hundreds of comments saying exactly the same thing and telling everyone that they are sexist while intentionally missing the point.
This kind of discrimination could be excused if it brought a tangible value to the company, but this reshuffling did nothing to help this ailing company.
Meyer's actions were discriminatory at worst; at best, it was merely gross incompetence.