upvote

points

by Manuel_D4 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby mullingitover3 hours ago|
[-]
> You're writing as though these are mutually exclusive things

That's how the law sees it.

reply
upvoteby Manuel_D3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
When has the court upheld a policy of setting a specific percentage racial or gender quota, and penalizing employees financially if that quota is not met? If I told my employees "I'll reduce your pay by 90% if you hire any pregnant women" that's not discrimination against gender and family status? You really think a court would buy this argument? Of course, 90% is a much bigger proportion of salary than the DEI bonuses in the example above, but fundamentally this is no different of a policy - it's still tying compensation to the protected class of hired candidates.

And again, you're still glossing over the other two examples: A manager at YouTube explicitly directed a recruiter to only proceed with diverse applicants. And Perkins Coie did, in fact, restrict eligibility for its fellowship program on the basis of race and sexual orientation (this was settled in 2023 after they agreed to stop discriminating. The 2025 judgement you linked above doesn't in any way defend Perkins Coie's hiring policies, only that Trump couldn't further punish them by banning them from federal buildings).

reply
upvoteby mullingitover3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> When has the court upheld a policy of setting a specific percentage racial or gender quota, and penalizing employees financially if that quota is not met?

Irrelevant.

> And again, you're still glossing over the other two examples

Two examples is not a pervasive problem in my opinion, so it's super easy to gloss over.

What is a pervasive problem is the tables being very tilted against certain groups of people.

reply
upvoteby 3 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby Manuel_D3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
If the courts haven't found in favor of companies using quotas as incentives, then you have no basis to claim that that quotas are legally acceptable as long as they're framed as incentives. This is directly relevant to your claims.

I find it noteworthy how often proponents of DEI talk in vague, euphemistic terms. You left me to guess what you mean by "certain groups of people". The group that I've witnessed benefit the most from DEI in tech companies is women - not Black people, or poor people. And the experimental evidence on the gender disparity in tech company recruiting does not back up the idea that women are disadvantaged when it comes to applying to tech companies: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID3946621_cod...

reply