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

Sexism at Uber from Female Management

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 234 posts

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#171

Post by SolarNet »

user5994461 wrote: post #152
caminante wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not following at all. Where does it say the manager "wasn't telling male workers to wear long sleeved shirts?" Even if so, how's that sexist? To say that something's sexist because a man gets different advice than a woman with no context is unacceptable criteria for sexism. Re: WFH, she's a junior employee (graduated in 2015) whose boss told her to "be at [her] desk to 'ensure that [she's] collaborating with the…

> Taking her claims at face value, she's not making a strong case for sexism. Agree. It's "just" a common case of "bad" management.

I think there is a deeper problem here with HR. Uber didn't care enough to figure out whether it was sexist or not (or even care enough to do anything about it at all). That means Uber is sexist simply by not caring enough to check (regardless of whether this was or wasn't sexism).

* As always a lot of caveats apply: If sexism is defined as legally culpable discrimination of a protected class (rather than looser social definitions, or even broader sociology definitions). If we take her statements at face value.

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#172

Post by thehardsphere »

caminante wrote: post #121
thehardsphere wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read a little more carefully. The problem here isn't really "sexism", it's that "Tina" has an insecure personality that feels threatened by the people on her team, and thus is marginalizing everyone on it who sticks out in an attempt to establish dominance. You're correct that a good manager could make a comment about a tank top being inappropriate attire at a given office. But note when Tina said this: it was when t…

Hellcow does understand the nuance you're raising. Respectfully, I don't think this blog post would get play if it didn't have the female-on-female sexism angle. The title's misleading: "Sexism at Uber from female management #UberStory"

> Respectfully, I don't think this blog post would get play if it didn't have the female-on-female sexism angle.

Probably entirely accurate.

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#173

Post by kchoudhu »

mizzao wrote: post #148
kchoudhu wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've got a chicken and egg problem here. The only way to train an engineer in this scheme is to have him manage people without having a clue, which necessarily implies breakage for the people working under him: definitionally a new person entering a specialized role has no idea how to carry out said role. The only thing that fixes this is extensive training before promotion -- but this is anathema in modern corpora…

Another way to learn is to work for a great manager and pay attention, or work for a crappy manager and see the consequences of mistakes. The latter is painful, but also more instructive than the former.

Life is way too short to spend time working for the abusive and the incompetent.

I prefer to mark the organization as broken and move on to greener pastures.

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#174

Post by btilly »

MBCook wrote: post #158
apercu wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HR only exists to keep the company free from liability.

Part of keeping the company free from liability is not enabling massive sexual harassment problems that end up causing multi-million (or billion) dollar (possibly class-action) lawsuits. Even an ultra-strict "HR only does what's good for the company" should lead to them preventing sexual harassment issues due to legal landscape.

HR has to operate within the constraints of the larger organization.

Under normal circumstances, HR tries to get the organization to behave reasonably, and employees to not get too upset about it, during or after their period of employment. The actions of both are actually out of their control, but they push both ways. It is a classic case of responsibility without authority.

If the organization refuses to take HR concerns seriously, then you get the result you see at Uber. The only thing that HR can do is try to get employees to toe the company line. Good HR people will leave. But there is always someone left to do the job. (It is just like death marches in software development. Which also seems to be a problem at Uber.)

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#175

Post by caminante »

neutronicus wrote: post #157
caminante wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm struggling to understand how that's sexism. Can you explain your criteria for sexism? (I'm asking in good faith.)

"Tina" is preying on the author's nascent anxieties about how her male co-workers perceive her body, clothing choices, etc. It's a form of harassment that's pretty obviously tailored to the author's gender (how many men report anxieties about being taken less seriously because they show too much skin?). The modern use of the word "sexism" includes gender-tailored harassment. It's a broader term nowadays than just "ho…

I also don't think sexism is limited to gender1 That said, I think you're argument's too broad. If you want to call it harrassment, call it harrassment, but I don't get sexism.

> (how many men report anxieties about being taken less seriously because they show too much skin?).

How many guys wear tank tops at work? Some do. In order for your criteria to be consistent, you're saying that if a man were to wear a tank top at Uber and his boss told him not to wear a tank top, that it'd be sexist? I think that's what you're saying. If so, that's a slippery slope as it would lead to ALL dress codes being discriminatory.

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#176

Post by naravara »

zaidf wrote: post #65
RickS wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During my exit from a previous employer over a CEO whose sexual misconduct makes Uber look like the ACLU, one of our investors gave me the advice that "the CEO sets the culture". The context there was that if the CEO and I didn't see eye to eye on something, that was never going to change while this person was CEO. In the time since, I've found that advice to be so reliably true that it's one of the core things I use…

...if the CEO and I didn't see eye to eye on something, that was never going to change while this person was CEO. This advice may be reliably true but I would also argue there are major exceptions. For example, take founder & ceo of any billion dollar company and you will find that they evolved drastically (in good and bad ways) over the years. Zuckerberg has radically transformed himself from an immature frat boy to…

>charitable, intelligent billionaire CEO.

The creepy and megalomaniacal strains of his personality, though, still seem to be there in full force and are reflected in his company and product.

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#177

Post by caminante »

MBCook wrote: post #153
caminante wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm struggling to understand how that's sexism. Can you explain your criteria for sexism? (I'm asking in good faith.)

It was a comment based on her appearance (and assumedly how 'sexy' she was dressing). That's the reason. If a Male manager told her she probably isn't doing well because of how she dresses (and she dresses reasonably) that would be sexism, so it's the same thing if it's another women doing it. On the scale of sexism this isn't as bad as the other things reported about Uber (she wasn't propositioned for example), but…

Thanks for sharing your perspective. Your comment has broadened my perception of sexism beyond "Can this person win in court?"

> If a Male manager told her she probably isn't doing well because of how she dresses (and she dresses reasonably) that would be sexism, so it's the same thing if it's another women doing it.

Yet, this isn't what happened! ;-)

According to the author's own words. Manager in a 1:1 a) asked if the author noticed the lack of eye contact with the other manager b) tentatively asked if the author thought it was because of the tank top and c) suggested the author wears long sleeves. The author's convinced the tank top isn't an issue because she gets ice cream with the subordinates.

To me, the author's drawing wild conclusions. Maybe her manager knows something or heard another manager make an off-hand comment about the dress code. I would appreciate that advice so I can decide for myself whether to make a simple adjustment to my wardrobe.

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#178

Post by kchoudhu »

david-cako wrote: post #101
omouse wrote: post #5

Surprise surprise, managers behave badly and it doesn't matter what their background is. Usually engineers have to go through rigorous interviews; maybe it's time that was stepped up for managers with better behavioural questions.

Is 2017 the year of the managerial whiteboard interview?

It may be the year of taking "fit" interviews seriously.

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#179

Post by tetromino_ »

m3rc wrote: post #135

Uh, you can still be sexist and also be a jerk... are you asking if people can only be one? And FFS, just look at women in their goddamn eyes, like a normal person. Not being sexist is like the easiest thing in the world, just don't be weird.

> just look at women in their goddamn eyes, like a normal person

s/normal person/socially well-adjusted American/

A big fraction of the world's population is strongly conditioned against looking in someone's eyes outside e.g. intimate or family settings.

Re: Sexism at Uber from Female Management

#180

Post by gotofritz »

zaidf wrote: post #65
RickS wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During my exit from a previous employer over a CEO whose sexual misconduct makes Uber look like the ACLU, one of our investors gave me the advice that "the CEO sets the culture". The context there was that if the CEO and I didn't see eye to eye on something, that was never going to change while this person was CEO. In the time since, I've found that advice to be so reliably true that it's one of the core things I use…

...if the CEO and I didn't see eye to eye on something, that was never going to change while this person was CEO. This advice may be reliably true but I would also argue there are major exceptions. For example, take founder & ceo of any billion dollar company and you will find that they evolved drastically (in good and bad ways) over the years. Zuckerberg has radically transformed himself from an immature frat boy to…

That may be true, but it doesn't really change the outcome -yes, you could stick around and hope the CEO does a Zuckerberg, but realistically the best strategy is to move on.
Post reply on HN