Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!

[Hank Chinaski]

So Trump cut DEI benefits, but companies are cutting their programs. Is their now a downside to having DEI now?

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

So Trump cut DEI benefits, but companies are cutting their programs. Is their now a downside to having DEI now?

Yes. It causes air traffic collisions.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

So Trump cut DEI benefits, but companies are cutting their programs. Is their now a downside to having DEI now?

We had to strip anything remotely DEI from our environment last year, and it was a complete and total nightmare given how much we emphasized diversity previously. (We're in one of the most diverse cities in the world. It's hard NOT to emphasize it.)

I suspect there is going to be a lot more discrimination/hostile work environment litigation because people are going to think that no DEI=carte blanche to be shitty to people based on sex, race, national origin, etc. Of course, I assume the EEOC will also be neutered, so maybe it will be harder to sue, but if I'm guessing the employment plaintiff's bar is going to eat well in the next few years.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

We had to strip anything remotely DEI from our environment last year, and it was a complete and total nightmare given how much we emphasized diversity previously. (We're in one of the most diverse cities in the world. It's hard NOT to emphasize it.)

I suspect there is going to be a lot more discrimination/hostile work environment litigation because people are going to think that no DEI=carte blanche to be shitty to people based on sex, race, national origin, etc. Of course, I assume the EEOC will also be neutered, so maybe it will be harder to sue, but if I'm guessing the employment plaintiff's bar is going to eat well in the next few years.

That's what I'm trying to understand. Why did you have to strip it? Can’t your organization just keep going as before?

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

That's what I'm trying to understand. Why did you have to strip it? Can’t your organization just keep going as before?

Because she works for the state, and the state should not discriminate on the basis of skin color.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Because she works for the state, and the state should not discriminate on the basis of skin color.

You’re explaining why they should stop. I’m asking why they had to.

Looks like Trump issued an EO that threatens if you don’t. Plus Texas probably has its own restrictions?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

You’re explaining why they should stop. I’m asking why they had to.

Looks like Trump issued an EO that threatens if you don’t. Plus Texas probably has its own restrictions?

The mechanism for punishment is a debarment process (you're no longer allowed to contract with the US) or a withholding of fed grants. The govt couldn't come close to bringing debarment actions (admin regulatory court proceedings) like that against all companies employing DEI or DEI similar programs.

Of course, all this is based on Chevron era powers of regulatory agencies. Idk if that's been altered since Chevron deference was gutted by SCOTUS last year.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Because she works for the state, and the state should not discriminate on the basis of skin color.

Popped back in to see that this shit never changes. Figured it would be Sebby trying to do the work of Stephen Miller by conflating DEI work to something it is decidedly not. But this stupid shit coming from you isn’t surprising. Fucking ridiculous.

See you all in another however many years.

TM

[Hank Chinaski]

In 1982 I got a job offer from the Patent Office to start July 83. Reagan got elected on a promise to slash the Federal workforce. I nervously watched every speech waiting to have my offer revoked. But he didn't paint with so broad a brush. PTO was needed and in fact they had a slug of hires from the late 50s that were retiring so it was on a hiring spree. Early 80s 2 government areas grew, DoD and PTO. You may disagree with what RR did otherwise, but thought at least went into it. I've been asking my Trump loving partners if they were worried PTO will lose people. "No because PTO actually generates money from user fees, brings in more than it costs." But PTO employees got the same email every other Fed employee got. There was no thought.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Popped back in to see that this shit never changes. Figured it would be Sebby trying to do the work of Stephen Miller by conflating DEI work to something it is decidedly not. But this stupid shit coming from you isn’t surprising. Fucking ridiculous.

See you all in another however many years.

TM

Dupe.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Popped back in to see that this shit never changes. Figured it would be Sebby trying to do the work of Stephen Miller by conflating DEI work to something it is decidedly not. But this stupid shit coming from you isn’t surprising. Fucking ridiculous.

See you all in another however many years.

TM

Like we will all be here. Something tells me that glassing Gaza and getting rid of TSA isn’t a winning combination.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Popped back in to see that this shit never changes. Figured it would be Sebby trying to do the work of Stephen Miller by conflating DEI work to something it is decidedly not. But this stupid shit coming from you isn’t surprising. Fucking ridiculous.

See you all in another however many years.

TM

Well, he certainly had my position wrong. I don't think the govt should be for or against DEI in the private sector. DEI seems to me to be a thing in which companies can choose to engage, or not engage, with all the attendant risks that come with either decision.

Biden's efforts to push it in the private sector and Trump's to eliminate it in the private sector are both overreaches. The govt does not belong in the business of telling or even incentivizing business in the area of social engineering, in any direction.

DOGE looks like a shitshow, but narrowing the govt's scope of operations in stuff like this would be a refreshing improvement. If you like DEI, do DEI. If you don't, don't do DEI. Seems an entirely private sector thing. Govt has no place in it, and our tax dollars should not be spent in advocacy for or against it.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Well, he certainly had my position wrong. I don't think the govt should be for or against DEI in the private sector. DEI seems to me to be a thing in which companies can choose to engage, or not engage, with all the attendant risks that come with either decision.

Biden's efforts to push it in the private sector and Trump's to eliminate it in the private sector are both overreaches. The govt does not belong in the business of telling or even incentivizing business in the area of social engineering, in any direction.

DOGE looks like a shitshow, but narrowing the govt's scope of operations in stuff like this would be a refreshing improvement. If you like DEI, do DEI. If you don't, don't do DEI. Seems an entirely private sector thing. Govt has no place in it, and our tax dollars should not be spent in advocacy for or against it.

Equality shouldn’t be voluntary. That’s what governments are for. To ensure people get equality under the law.

Want to get rid of DEI? Only when you have actual equal opportunity.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Surprised that so many people seem to be posting about where RT works without knowing where em works.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Well, he certainly had my position wrong. I don't think the govt should be for or against DEI in the private sector. DEI seems to me to be a thing in which companies can choose to engage, or not engage, with all the attendant risks that come with either decision.

Biden's efforts to push it in the private sector and Trump's to eliminate it in the private sector are both overreaches. The govt does not belong in the business of telling or even incentivizing business in the area of social engineering, in any direction.

DOGE looks like a shitshow, but narrowing the govt's scope of operations in stuff like this would be a refreshing improvement. If you like DEI, do DEI. If you don't, don't do DEI. Seems an entirely private sector thing. Govt has no place in it, and our tax dollars should not be spent in advocacy for or against it.

And this morning DOJ is threatening criminal prosecution of private companies engaging in DEI...

ETA: The all out assault on "DEI" is pretty astounding. Companies engaged in combination of marketing and typical HR cya are apparently and affront to equality now.