doesn’t mean everyone positioning themselves as a victim is someone wanting money and attention. I didn’t say they’re right, I just said it is probably not unimportant when they go so far to run a class-action lawsuit. You don’t shit thousands of dollars in lawyers’ throats when you have no chance of winning.
And even if they don’t have any base for their claims, the case is still interesting because we’d see who wins even if there’s no hard evidence ;)
I think you missed what this s/he tried to point out. No one is arguing that equal pay is not important, and that it is fine if it’s not. This comment is talking about that they may be using current political mood to win themselves public praise and a lot of money, while maybe just being less competent than colleagues that they pointed at. This comment isn’t talking about google.
I’m not talking about google at all. Life is not black and white. Systems heavily impact human bevaviour, but google is a company full of different people. There can be a milion of reasons how they ended up with lower pay, and it ended up in court.
They can’t be ideologicaly saint or moraly clean if they work there, assuming that google is evil (well I try to stay as far from their products as I can).
They got suddenly woke after realising that they wanted higher pay. It’s not statistics, there should be some record on every person and reason why they got such and such salary. If they have higher qualifications, work there or in industry longer, work more/better, and have smaller pay then they should get rise and there is a lot of dumb people at google because they should realise that and do review of everyones pay and correct them. Instead this ended up in court. So this didn’t happen and a lot of people is really hard headed there or unusually google is a victim here. We will see who wins, and if we agree.
I would like to see floss thrive, but not because of woke people destroying companies from inside for no reason, or for wrong reasons.
I’m dubious about morality when huge amounts od money are on the stake. Because there is a difference between fighting for some one/group of people to change and become better, and wanting to get rich quick on someones back and slap human rights sticker on it.
Also I can be totally wrong with every idea above. And I can see your point of view.
it’s weird that you rather believe a multinational corporation does nothing nefarious because once they had a slogan “don’t be evil” which they quietly retired, instead of the way more likely idea that women are systematically paid less. Look at how capitalism brainwashed you.
A court does not act on simple allegations, but on facts. If they aren’t being treated fairly then they will from now on, and if they already are, then, good for them.
deleted by creator
Yes, equal pay for equal work is important. No matter what capitalism tells you.
You didn’t even make it better with your edit. It’s not OK just because it happens everywhere.
deleted by creator
doesn’t mean everyone positioning themselves as a victim is someone wanting money and attention. I didn’t say they’re right, I just said it is probably not unimportant when they go so far to run a class-action lawsuit. You don’t shit thousands of dollars in lawyers’ throats when you have no chance of winning.
And even if they don’t have any base for their claims, the case is still interesting because we’d see who wins even if there’s no hard evidence ;)
deleted by creator
I think you missed what this s/he tried to point out. No one is arguing that equal pay is not important, and that it is fine if it’s not. This comment is talking about that they may be using current political mood to win themselves public praise and a lot of money, while maybe just being less competent than colleagues that they pointed at. This comment isn’t talking about google.
Let’s just hope judge will get to the truth :)
OK, so we’re doing in dubio pro reo for corporations with a bad track record now? On Lemmy? I must have missed something.
I’m not talking about google at all. Life is not black and white. Systems heavily impact human bevaviour, but google is a company full of different people. There can be a milion of reasons how they ended up with lower pay, and it ended up in court.
They can’t be ideologicaly saint or moraly clean if they work there, assuming that google is evil (well I try to stay as far from their products as I can).
They got suddenly woke after realising that they wanted higher pay. It’s not statistics, there should be some record on every person and reason why they got such and such salary. If they have higher qualifications, work there or in industry longer, work more/better, and have smaller pay then they should get rise and there is a lot of dumb people at google because they should realise that and do review of everyones pay and correct them. Instead this ended up in court. So this didn’t happen and a lot of people is really hard headed there or unusually google is a victim here. We will see who wins, and if we agree.
I would like to see floss thrive, but not because of woke people destroying companies from inside for no reason, or for wrong reasons.
I’m dubious about morality when huge amounts od money are on the stake. Because there is a difference between fighting for some one/group of people to change and become better, and wanting to get rich quick on someones back and slap human rights sticker on it.
Also I can be totally wrong with every idea above. And I can see your point of view.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
it’s weird that you rather believe a multinational corporation does nothing nefarious because once they had a slogan “don’t be evil” which they quietly retired, instead of the way more likely idea that women are systematically paid less. Look at how capitalism brainwashed you.
deleted by creator
If you systematically pay a huge percentage of workforce less, how is there no monetary gain?
deleted by creator
A court does not act on simple allegations, but on facts. If they aren’t being treated fairly then they will from now on, and if they already are, then, good for them.
no, I think this case should be dismissed since someone has another opinion.