81–90 of 118 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Not being sexually harassed" is not a political ideology, it's a fundamental human right.
In the event of sexual harassment, you may be right. Certainly, female sexual rights have been a moral point of interest for a century or so, and it's not one that shared by all cultures today. And it was shared by almost none in pre-industrial societies. So, I'm not sure there's the level of proof that it's a "fundamental human right" in the way that liberty has been proven in political philosophy. But praveenbeatle…
Of course it's true (sadly) that sexual harassment happens. It's also true that some women are almost comically hypersensitive about this stuff (like the "dongle" incident at that Python conference).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Not being sexually harassed" is not a political ideology, it's a fundamental human right.
In the event of sexual harassment, you may be right. Certainly, female sexual rights have been a moral point of interest for a century or so, and it's not one that shared by all cultures today. And it was shared by almost none in pre-industrial societies. So, I'm not sure there's the level of proof that it's a "fundamental human right" in the way that liberty has been proven in political philosophy. But praveenbeatle…
Does anyone else wonder why this is getting so much media attention? Presumably any company above a certain size is likely to have one or two HR-related lawsuits happening at any particular time. I can't imagine this being big news if she worked for IBM or HP. They also shoehorned in an unrelated story about worker safety. What is the Guardian's agenda here? Is it just that Tesla (and Musk) are very high profile at t…
Almost any article about HP or IBM is less newsworthy than one about Tesla, atm.
Does anyone else wonder why this is getting so much media attention? Presumably any company above a certain size is likely to have one or two HR-related lawsuits happening at any particular time. I can't imagine this being big news if she worked for IBM or HP. They also shoehorned in an unrelated story about worker safety. What is the Guardian's agenda here? Is it just that Tesla (and Musk) are very high profile at t…
To make money by getting clicks/selling papers. This story deals with the coolest company led by the coolest CEO in the coolest sector and that same sector is known for having "problems" with women. Of course it's a story.
>At the time, Vandermeyden said she was hopeful her lawsuit and public comments would not end her career at the company. How could she honestly expect to keep her job with an employer she is sueing and smearing in the media? Why would she even want to continue working there?
Her employer is a company. Companies don't have the emotions people have. In large organisations, the effect of employee lawsuits may even be beneficial, because it allows for a mechanism to escalate serious issues before they become even worse, while the high barriers in terms of cost, emotional burden etc. serve to discourage frivolous complaints.
The other part of your comment - again, nice on paper, but never seen this in real life, at least not in big companies.
Does anyone else wonder why this is getting so much media attention? Presumably any company above a certain size is likely to have one or two HR-related lawsuits happening at any particular time. I can't imagine this being big news if she worked for IBM or HP. They also shoehorned in an unrelated story about worker safety. What is the Guardian's agenda here? Is it just that Tesla (and Musk) are very high profile at t…
Well… the newsworthiness of any particular thing is pretty far removed from the objective importance of the thing, for any definition of importance or objectivity that don’t make the statement tautological. There was a comment pile on on another thread when someone likened opioid addiction to terrorism, because opioid addiction causes a hundred times more death and injury than terrorism. Terrorism is more newsworthy…
It feels like there's a kind of schadenfreude at play, like people are delighted to see that an innovative 'new' company has any problems at all. Nobody would be the slightest bit interested in knowing if (say) Toyota had workplace accident rates 30% above average.
Or, (putting the tinfoil hat on), there's a PR 'submarine' at play here and someone stands to gain from rubbishing Tesla.
Does anyone else wonder why this is getting so much media attention? Presumably any company above a certain size is likely to have one or two HR-related lawsuits happening at any particular time. I can't imagine this being big news if she worked for IBM or HP. They also shoehorned in an unrelated story about worker safety. What is the Guardian's agenda here? Is it just that Tesla (and Musk) are very high profile at t…
>What is the Guardian's agenda here? To make money by getting clicks/selling papers. This story deals with the coolest company led by the coolest CEO in the coolest sector and that same sector is known for having "problems" with women. Of course it's a story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla isn't merely claiming they've met her needs, they're actually claiming that she's received privileged treatment because she's a woman: > Tesla added that Vandermeyden had been granted numerous positions “over other more qualified candidates” and was “given special treatment and opportunities for advancement that were unwarranted based on her qualifications”.
> Tesla isn't merely claiming they've met her needs, they're actually claiming that she's received privileged treatment because she's a woman: If that's true, they are admitting to sexual discrimination and opening themselves up to further lawsuits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps if the people responsible for the problems were fired instead?
She talked to the press when her allegations were found to be unmerited. Who's responsible for the problems again?