An engineer at Google who was fired for a memo assailing the company's diversity policies is considering legal action. However, he seemingly faces long odds of a successful case.
James Damore lost his job after authoring a 10-page essay that said women are not biologically fit for certain technology roles. Damore also warned against arbitrary social engineering of tech just to make it appealing to equal portions of both men and women. He claimed that efforts to hire more women via such methods are misguided and biased.
Mr. Damore told Reuters that he was exploring his options and said he had filed a charge with the National Labor Relations Board before he was fired. Another email revealed that he would likely be pursuing legal action.
The employment law gives employers broad discretion to fire at-will, for workers who do not have contracts, like those negotiated by unions, that create more stringent requirements to fire someone.
Google CEO Sundar Pinchai wrote an email in which he backed the rights of employees to express themselves but said Mr. Damore’s comments breached the company’s code of conduct and “cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.
A professor and labour law expert at UC Hastings College of Law said that such reasoning should be a sufficient reason for Mr Damore’s firing.
Mr Damore claimed to have received support from a number of colleagues for his views. Some have also supported his right to hold such opinions even if they do not agree with them.
Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, has said that he was offering Mr Damore a job, adding that "censorship is for losers".
You claim that "a 10-page essay that said women are not biologically fit for certain technology roles"
This is not true. What was stated in the essay was that it is to be expected that there will be less women in these roles because statistically women are more favored for other occupations.
It is quite frustrating to see a lack of comprehension among my peers that it is possible to explain a natural phenomenon without attaching a social justice motive and value judgement. We ARE different. Differences exist. Being different is not wrong. We do not need to make excused for differences nor enforce some type of "equalization" that counteracts the consequences of these differences. Let people be people. This is not complicated.
What happened to "diversity" of opinion?
Or did that just mean "absolutely no white right wing opinions ever"?
I think you know the answer.
His facts came in part from old poor quality discredited studies. A study that he's ignored vast sections of so as to cherry pick 'evidence'. One book source is so bad the author can't even replicate his statistics and is considered ridicuously flawed, add to that neuroscientists disagree with this self-serving fool. The odds are it's just another failure looking to get a payday because he is shit at his job and has probably been passed over and his fragile little ego can't take it.
You really, REALLY hate whites, don't you?
How much is david brock paying you?
Or is it George "satan incarnate" Soros you work for?
You know davie boy is a kiddy diddler and soros finked on his own people (jews) right?
You understand what kind of people are paying you to shill, right?
Morally depraved and utterly disgusting.
6411, Are you all right? You seem to be having a breakdown, was there someone in particular you were upset at? No one here has mentioned whites or sucked up to Soros or Brock, for that matter who do you think your unknown nemesis is shilling for or about. I feel kind of sorry for you, you are clearly at the very least confused, you may want to check which comment on which article you're responding to, in the meantime I'd reccomend seeking mental health advice as soon as possible, get well soon and stay safe.