Silicon Valley: Perks for Some Workers, Struggles for Parents

Re:Silicon Valley: Perks for Some Workers, Struggles for Par... by Retra on Tuesday April 07, 2015 @06:26PM (#9337603)

I can sue you, if I wanted. It doesn't mean you're guilty of wrongdoing. It means I'm exercising my right to use the legal process to resolve conflict.

I really don't see how you think that's the problem.

PS: The UNNAMED employer was really vilified here. Damn them!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley: Perks for Some Workers, Struggles for Par... by bequanna on Tuesday April 07, 2015 @07:53PM (#9337957)

If some employers think people in protected classes are more likely to sue when let go (even if the employer did nothing wrong), they might be less likely to hire them in the first place.

This isn't hypothetical. This is actually happening.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley: Perks for Some Workers, Struggles for Par... by SteveGerencser on Tuesday April 07, 2015 @11:47PM (#9338692)

I can confirm this anecdotally with my father's factory. Even with documented piece rates, documented averages from all employees, and having a very racially and gender positive hiring policy, it became a running issue of having to spend time in court every time someone was fired for cause. Over a 15 year span they were sued 18 times and lost 'none' of them because they were very strict in documenting everything.

While not a the 'major' factor, it was a factor in reducing the size of the company and specializing rather than growing it and working on more generic product lines. by reducing the size of the company they were able to reduce the need to hire and plan for being sued at least once a year by someone in a protected class that decided that they had been discriminated against.

Based on conversations with him and others in similar positions this is not uncommon.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley: Perks for Some Workers, Struggles for Par... by dragonwriter on Tuesday April 07, 2015 @07:56PM (#9337972)

> If some employers think people in protected classes are more likely to sue when let go (even if the employer did nothing wrong), they might be less likely to hire them in the first place.

The solution is to make them also think that people in these classes are equally likely to sue if not hired, and particularly likely to win if the employer is, in fact, discriminating against them in hiring.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley: Perks for Some Workers, Struggles for Par... by bequanna on Tuesday April 07, 2015 @08:05PM (#9338001)

I don't disagree with that solution, I just don't know how it would be implemented.

I seems like it is much easier to prove discrimination existed when firing vs. discrimination when hiring.

I think that instead of being focused on enforcement and punishments, we should be focused on eliminating discrimination by changing perceptions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley: Perks for Some Workers, Struggles for Par... by chipotle_coyote on Tuesday April 07, 2015 @10:57PM (#9338580)

I think that instead of being focused on enforcement and punishments, we should be focused on eliminating discrimination by changing perceptions.

I don't think those are mutually exclusive.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley: Perks for Some Workers, Struggles for Par... by Retra on Tuesday April 07, 2015 @09:40PM (#9338323)

Either way, it is the law they have to answer to, and you don't get that by saying "be timid and don't stand up for yourself."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley: Perks for Some Workers, Struggles for Par... by Bahamut on Tuesday April 07, 2015 @09:40PM (#9338324)

Fear of this outcome isn't the answer.

[ Parent | on HN ]