Tldr: the claim is that when male managers are faced with stack ranking employees, they will often choose male reports over female reports due to sexist bias.
When I look at the female managers in my company I don't think they do any better.
Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
91–100 of 124 posts
Re: Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
#92I think this is a more issue of "Stack Ranking", which by itself should be illegal, but somewhat it is still legal.
While pretty much all employment in the US is "at will" employment, "good faith" is assumed in the system....
Stack Ranking by default is a "bad faith" system, where the employer, will fire people, even though the employees were good performers (if you are in a team of all good performers, it is common place that stack ranking punishes good performers/employees as well).
It is very similar to the "decimation" system that the Roman Army practiced, when a particular unit or legion performed bad or cowardly in battle, one in ten was chosen (via short sticks), and culled to death by their companions. Very brutal, and can't see how it improves morale even if the unit itself is actually performing well. (which stack ranking is, constant decimation). This causes rampant politicking and favoritism to the point that systematic discrimination arises from it.
Re: Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
#93Many of my friends have stopped using Uber in favor of Lyft. Is this a real trend, or just something I see in Silicon Valley tech circles?
I've been using Lyft a lot more because it's actually become cheaper than Uber in LA.
Re: Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
#94I think this is a more issue of "Stack Ranking", which by itself should be illegal, but somewhat it is still legal. While pretty much all employment in the US is "at will" employment, "good faith" is assumed in the system.... Stack Ranking by default is a "bad faith" system, where the employer, will fire people, even though the employees were good performers (if you are in a team of all good performers, it is common…
That doesn't sound very similar to decimation. Stack ranking is picking and punishing the worst team members based on some system. Decimation was purely random.
Decimation was a system for BUILDING cohesion. You don't flee battle because you might be decimated. You don't let your comrades flee battle because you might be decimated. It's for when you want to severely punish a collective group of people but can't afford to hurt them all.
Stack ranking is the opposite. You are actively competing against your colleagues. You are incentivized for your colleagues to fail.
Re: Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
#95I think this is a more issue of "Stack Ranking", which by itself should be illegal, but somewhat it is still legal. While pretty much all employment in the US is "at will" employment, "good faith" is assumed in the system.... Stack Ranking by default is a "bad faith" system, where the employer, will fire people, even though the employees were good performers (if you are in a team of all good performers, it is common…
Decimation also generally involved the unit beating the unlucky member to death themselves, as part of the punishment.
Re: Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
> without even allowing for the possibility that women just actually are worse employees than men. Again, you're reading what you want to read.
How else can you read "consistent differences in merit between subpopulations" when the context is gender discrimination in employee performance reviews?
Male, female, transgender, white, black, straight, homosexual, rich, poor, country of origin...
Again, this is my point. Any time there is an overabundance of straight white males, and only straight white males, discrimination is presumed, with no actual evidence to suggest that these groups are equal in every task.
You wouldn't argue that there are not systematic differences in physical performance between these various groups, but somehow cognitive performance, which is even more strongly influenced by environment and upbringing, is not allowed to be examined objectively.
Re: Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
#97I think this is a more issue of "Stack Ranking", which by itself should be illegal, but somewhat it is still legal. While pretty much all employment in the US is "at will" employment, "good faith" is assumed in the system.... Stack Ranking by default is a "bad faith" system, where the employer, will fire people, even though the employees were good performers (if you are in a team of all good performers, it is common…
That doesn't sound very similar to decimation. Stack ranking is picking and punishing the worst team members based on some system. Decimation was purely random. Decimation was a system for BUILDING cohesion. You don't flee battle because you might be decimated. You don't let your comrades flee battle because you might be decimated. It's for when you want to severely punish a collective group of people but can't affor…
You missed the part that in a team of good performers, (i.e. no dead woods in the team), it ends up being a defacto "random" system.... when it comes to actual performance, and that's where politiking and favoritisms kick in.
Both have the "Culture of Fear" as a central point, and yes, stack ranking has its roots on the Roman Decimation system.
http://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/article-details/performance-impr...
Re: Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Translation: “I don’t see sexism so it isn’t a problem.” On a serious note, tech companies, large and small, have varying amounts of lawsuits and news coverage. I agree that stack ranking and other rating methods make illegal discrimination more likely. I do not agree with your assertion that unreported discrimination based off sex doesn’t occur.
That is not the assertion I am making. You've also shifted the goalposts: you're talking about sexism in the workplace, which I agree is rampant in our industry, and I'm talking about performance review systems that are structurally or endemically biased against women, which obviously also exist, but pretty clearly don't exist everywhere.
Sorry, I missed the distinction.
Re: Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lyft aren't even available in most places that Uber are, so I can't see it being much of a wider trend.
Is this referencing outside the US? I travel very frequently to both rural and urban areas in the US and have yet to find a place where I could not Lyft, but could Uber. In fact... I have only been to one place where I could not Lyft, and it turned out I also couldn't Uber (very rural).
Yes I don't think Lyft is available outside the US at all is it? I couldn't even use it when I was in the US as I don't have a US phone number.
Re: Uber's Employee Ratings Put Women at a Disadvantage, Suit Says
#100Lol, lame reasoning. What happened to iron clad empirical evidence before suing? Oh I guess that was never the case, eh?
You are correct, even if you meant to be trolling. It was never the case that suing required iron clad empirical evidence. Civil cases in the United States use the "preponderance of evidence" standard, not the "iron clad" standard you just made up.
Note you need a "preponderance of evidence" to win a suit, not to bring a suit in the first place. Many times the plaintiff doesn't have sufficient evidence for a win when they bring the suit, and get that evidence during the discovery phase, during depositions, subpoenas, etc.