Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

indiatoday.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 667 posts

Re: Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

#401

Post by gedy »

colpabar wrote: post #284
duxup wrote: post #189

I worked at a company where this was an issue at one point (granted this was one situation among a lot of employees). A manager was pretty much dismissive of everything anyone of a lower caste did / wouldn't communicate with them effectively. HR absolutely struggled with the issue. The HR folks tasked with dealing with discrimination issues largely had spent their time constructing company wide emails and classes tha…

> HR absolutely struggled with the issue. The HR folks tasked with dealing with discrimination issues largely had spent their time constructing company wide emails and classes that revolved around white folks discriminating against others / concepts of privilege, absolutely froze when faced with a discrimination issue outside that stereotype. Cue the pro DEI (i honestly don’t know what it’s called anymore) people cla…

Maybe "no true Scotsmxn" etc

Re: Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

#402

Post by krainboltgreene »

negamax wrote: post #319
BurningFrog wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

100x this. I told a white SJW colleague that I never felt discriminated by whites, I am a PoC. I was told "You are naive" People take a really small sample set and paint the whole world with a very wide brush

The parent of your comment wasn't talking about non-white people feeling discriminated by whites.

Re: Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

#403

Post by elteto »

abduhl wrote: post #387
saalweachter wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing they weren't sure whether caste was a protected class. Discrimination in law revolves around protected classes (race, religion, national origin, age and sex are the "big five" in the US, and subsequent acts and decisions have added sexual orientation/gender identity, familial status, pregnancy, disability, veteran status, and genetic information). If you act on the basis of that, someone can, well, make…

Why is caste not a subset of national origin or race? Do Indians who discriminate on the basis of caste also discriminate against non-Indians of a lower caste, or is it solely confined to other Indians? If not directly a protected class, why would this not clearly be a disparate impact type of case?

It’s not that it is or it isn’t. The US legal system is based on precedent so if there’s little history of previous cases where this was decided then it’s very hard to know how it will go in court.

Everyone loves citing precedent but nobody wants to be the first one to try and set it.

Re: Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

#404

Post by naniwaduni »

Zvez wrote: post #348

I wonder is it really necessary to explicitly ban every sort of discrimination? Shouldn't it be simple 'discrimination is not allowed'? Otherwise we will be listing every type of discrimination and revisiting this list every now and then. And it leads to questions like 'is it acceptable to discriminate by boldness if it is not in the list?' While I agree that such not-so-well-known discriminations should be publicall…

Cue the ambulance-chasers bringing discrimination lawsuits on behalf of paraplegics alleging discrimination in the field of carrying boxes up and down stairs.

Re: Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

#405

Post by RhysU »

dgs_sgd wrote: post #268
paiute wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

White americans do this too. Think ozarks. I know plenty of ridiculously smart people from this region, who if they talked about the food they ate or didn't work hard to extinguish their accents would probably not have jobs w/ coastal tech companies.

The discrimination based on accent is obvious to me but the food surprises me.. what kind of food from that region is looked down upon on the coasts?

Scrapple.

Spam.

Iceberg lettuce.

Re: Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

#406

Post by Akronymus »

boplicity wrote: post #394
Akronymus wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you explain how correcting a past mistake is racism? Because its not correcting a past mistake. But rather make new ones that inevittably are going to lead to even more resentment. And also hurting the ones you are supposedly helping by making them question whether they got in through their abilities or through diversity points. Which can lead to quite a large reduction in their self confidence. I would call th…

Just to clarify, you reasons against this are: 1. It will make some people resentful. 2. It will cause "doubt" among people who benefit. In essence, your first argument is about further benefiting the people who are already in an advantaged position. And your second argument is blaming people who would benefit. Yikes. That is some twisted logic.

> Just to clarify, you reasons against this are:

I will NOT let you put words into my mouth

> 1. It will make some people resentful.

Thats not the reason I am against racism, that is a consequence of racism. The resentment will lead to racism against the people who benefited from the racism. You can't break that cycle with more racism.

> 2. It will cause "doubt" among people who benefit.

It will lead to a lower self esteem, which leads to less likely to negotiate for high salaries, which leads to a wage gap between different races in the same profession.

There are MUCH better ways to get a "better" ratio, like expanding the pool of applicants of underrepresented groups. For example, through advertisments in areas where such people could be located. I have nothing against that.

What I have a problem with, is justifying racism in the name of fighting racism.

> In essence, your first argument is about further benefiting the people who are already in an advantaged position. And your second argument is blaming people who would benefit. Yikes. That is some twisted logic.

This, to me, reads like arguing in bad faith.

Re: Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

#407

Post by rajup »

bgdam wrote: post #298
thorncorona wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know why this happened?

It's nothing that requires much research. The current national government openly supports discrimination on religious and caste based backgrounds. 7 years of this, and people who used to think "Caste is a taboo subject, and we should be working around it", now think "Caste pride is cool".

Hmm the current Prime Minister of India is from a "lower" caste. The current president of India is from a "lower" caste. Curious how you come up with "the current national government openly supports discrimination on religious and caste based backgrounds".

Re: Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

#408

Post by pc86 »

abduhl wrote: post #387
saalweachter wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing they weren't sure whether caste was a protected class. Discrimination in law revolves around protected classes (race, religion, national origin, age and sex are the "big five" in the US, and subsequent acts and decisions have added sexual orientation/gender identity, familial status, pregnancy, disability, veteran status, and genetic information). If you act on the basis of that, someone can, well, make…

Why is caste not a subset of national origin or race? Do Indians who discriminate on the basis of caste also discriminate against non-Indians of a lower caste, or is it solely confined to other Indians? If not directly a protected class, why would this not clearly be a disparate impact type of case?

My understanding is that non-Indians are simply outside the caste system entirely. So to the extent that there are Indians who view themselves as better than non-Indians, that's less caste discrimination and more good old fashioned racism.

Re: Apple becomes first tech giant to explicitly ban caste discrimination

#410

Post by pc86 »

adamsmith143 wrote: post #368
richiebful1 wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding of the situation is that Western countries/companies don't usually have protected class status on basis of caste. Those protections exist for race, gender, age etc.

Ok are there also specific legal protections for Eye color, Hair Color, presence of Freckles, etc? Does every possible way to discriminate need to be clearly spelled out for it to be illegal?

Your question seems to stem from the belief that discrimination is illegal, which it is not. Discrimination is completely legal, including in hiring practices, as long as you're not discriminating against a protected class (either directly or by proxy). That's why the classes are explicitly enumerated, because if it's not in that list you can discriminate based on it.

If you want to open a shop and put a sign out that says "No customers with blue eyes permitted" you're completely within your right to do so. But let's say you discriminated against some other form of eyes, that maybe disproportionately affected groups of a particular race or national origin, that would be illegal.

Post reply on HN