Snacktivist
I've seen a lot of docs and written a bunch of docs for higher ups in one of the FAANG companies (one of my docs made it's way to the CEO level). The advice I heard often in reviews was "no weasel words" and "don't interpret the data - assume your audience is smart enough to understand the implications."
One interesting thing that stood out to me is that the lower levels tended to review exactly what was written in the docs while reviews at the VP and SVP level read the docs and used them as launch pads for discussion - it never stuck to the content in the doc. This is likely there's another reason to not inject pettiness in that it doesn't just get in the way of consuming the information, but gets in the way of having the larger discussion that everyone is interested in.
That sort of statement is always true, but that doesn't negate the real dangers of the Right using it for political advantage. Their general approach is to drive a wedge between different groups in the US (and abroad), pit them against each other, and have them take out their rage on each other as a means to distract them from the real issues going on. It was clear at the time that the Trump administration wasn't after "the truth" but more after a way to keep people occupied - and if that puts a lot of people in danger, they don't really care.
And before anyone tries to defend the Right, take a look at these basekless attacks on drag queens. Meanwhile we have school shootings happening all the time and they don't do anything about it. It's a big shame because the a large portion of the USA isn't about trying to make things better - they just want to rage and cause damage towards others.
1. Managers cannot be part of a union - only individual contributors.
There's a lot to unpack here. This can really set up an "us vs them" mindset which when takes hole has things go sideways. It makes switching from IC to manager or manager to IC potentially more complicated (and even contentious). There's are other issues in that managers typically focus on roadmap and where the company is going while many ICs I know want to just focus on getting their work done.
2. Union members are not part of the board.
This was something that we felt was unbalanced and relegates unions to not actually having the right level of influence.
When we did some research we found that there are better models for unions out there to reference: Japan and Germany. As part of this research we found that unions in the US have been watered down and regulation/legislation has been passed to weaken in. So you get stuff like "right to work" states or what sorts of things you are allowed to strike over.
With that said, things absolutely need to shift in a lot of sectors but I'm not sure if unions are the solution that everyone thinks (hopes?) it is.
Great point and something to really keep in mind with this stuff.
But when it comes to usefulness of the study, I disagree. It indicates something is off but like you point out, the problem isn't likely with the teenagers. Something else going on around them is worth digging into and figuring out why there is an imbalance.