CEO of Blizz took an ENORMOUS compensation cut and opened up the company to employee harassment grievances as well as promising to heavily increase the non-male employee component of their labor force. Also they are now firing anyone who retaliates in any way for someone else calling out their harassment, I.E if you say someone is harassing you and they do something to “get you back”, they will be immediately fired.
1 Like
I think that’s exactly the point being made: he wants the company to succeed with a stake on it.
The issue is that several industries have biases against hiring women, so that even if they are more qualified, they will not be perceived that way, and thus will lose the job(or promotion) to a less qualified man. The video game and tech industries are two such industries.
4 Likes
Yeehaw. Way to go to punish all potential male applicants for the actions of a few other men!
5 Likes
The pay cut doesn’t matter at all
7 Likes
While “affirmative action” has some arguments against it when implemented with no insight, the hostility of simply getting into the industry or just to be taken seriously is a big thing that should be considered as well.
You may have just as many qualified male applicants, but they systemically have an advantage getting jobs that might be evened out with better hiring practices.
3 Likes
True, but whenever an industry or company says they are going to be more Diverse, Inclusive, or have Equity (The D.I.E. Method), they tend to just end up hiring based on gender, race, or ethnicity. Not that the individual has actual skill, but rather because they need to fill a quota to look good in the public eye.
It’s kind of belittling to be judged based on the color of one’s skin or traits they were born with, rather than the content of their character or merits they possess…
2 Likes
It’s not like they won’t hire men… they’re just looking for more people who aren’t men. Considering the ratio is 80:20 right now and it said in the lawsuit that they were unjustly turning away female applicants, I think this is a fine change.
1 Like
I think the guys just need to learn to act in a professional manner when they’re in a professional setting.
If it’s 80% guys and 20% girls… that honestly doesn’t bother me at all… as long as all of them are qualified.
Because when you start trying to force 50/50 ratios into everything, you will inevitably start being forced to hire underqualified people. Equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome is what it should be about.
9 Likes
Perhaps this is evidence (as if any was needed) that employees don’t just do what their employee tells them.
I’m surprised I had to argue this but this is a tweet from an Overwatch team member saying that the CEO paycut is meaningless.
And some people thought Team 4 were forced to do the McCree name change.
Jesus.
6 Likes
Well, clearly they now have an official systemic disadvantage when it comes to getting hired by Blizzard, don’t they?
That statistic is meaningless without knowing the ratio among applicants.
You can say anything in the wording of a lawsuit. The whole point of having courts is to check claims made like this one in order to see whether the allegations of discriminatory hiring are actually true.
1 Like
nah bro, all of blizzard is rotten, everything is PR, brain empty no thoughts BRRRRRRRRRR
2 Likes
Yes, it does feel horrible to be a “diversity hire”(which is more imposter syndrome than anything), but at the same time there’s no easy way to fix the issue. Also, in technical fields, people who aren’t up to the minimum qualifications won’t get hired anyways.
You can’t say “just hire based on merit” because that’s what the system in place is supposed to do, but doesn’t accomplish. And when it comes to fixing their work culture, diversity is a must.
This.
2 Likes
While I do agree in theory, what it means over years is that certain groups will NEVER catch up.
E.g. if you were hiring for a CEO and were looking for 20 years of relevant experience. It would only be men.
If you move 10 years down the line, that will still be the case because no women would have been hired under those parameters.
The dominant group has an advantage that snowballs over time. Affirmative action is an imperfect, unfair, blunt instrument for a complex problem but honestly, there aren’t alternatives that will bring real equality.
In reality, affirmative action if done properly would change hiring policies to ensure you are not looking for experience you don’t need that excludes certain groups. Still, it wil be unfair.
And sometimes racist if implemented incorrectly. “Omg you’re a POC! I have to lower the bar for you despite being perfectly able to compete with everyone else and having a normal upbringing.”
Also, how is a POC with a low socioeconomic background supposed to compete against a POC with a middle+ socioeconomic background? Perhaps ethicity is a factor in getting selected for a job… for better or worse. But how you were raised and what resources you had available to you growing up is a much stronger factor. And I won’t let any BS tell me otherwise.
Equality of opportunity for ethnicity with very, very slight additional equity if you face some BS (which everyone from the poor to rich can face).
And equity of outcome for those with lower socioeconomic class. Because they really did get screwed by chance, and unlike their ethnicity, it affects your ability to compete. They shouldn’t face no obstacles, but a chance should be given instead of no or little opportunity.
1 Like
Do they? Or are they on even ground since their applications which used to be less likely to be simply tossed at first glance if they would because they were female or non-conforming to preconceived notions of what someone who works in tech should be?
That’s not a “systemic disadvantage” if one company decides it’s going to do it’s best until a better ratio is achieved.
The tech industry, especially the gaming industry is notoriously hostile to women and non-binaries, not just accepting them as equals but questioning the validity of their products and experience.
On it’s face “affirmative action” sounds unfair, but that’s only if you ignore the state of the current job market and prevalent attitudes.
3 Likes
I feel like if genuine human beings were the ones doing the hiring–people like the ones in film where they look at resumes, use their experience and foreknowledge to find the most likely candidate–we wouldn’t be having this problem.
Why is it so hard for corporations to keep some semblance of humility/humanity? Especially those of higher standing: even if you have all the power, you’re still going to be buried six-feet under when the time comes, so why act like a superior entity above a fellow human?
Mostly because of cliques and abuse of networking (hiring friends). In an ideal setting, one’s resume, accomplishments, accolades and ability should net them some leverage: though barring participation trophies, I find those insulting, but I digress.
2 Likes
Well we also have inherent biases e.g. we assume people are less intelligent based on their accent when you can speak the Queen’s English and be an idiot while being extremely intelligent with a cockney accent.
Remember too that our measures for intelligence are biased towards having better socioeconomic background but intelligence does not necessarily equate to successful job performance.
2 Likes
That’s not entirely true. Our measures for intelligence rely on a satisfactory education for you to apply your raw intelligence fully regardless.
A genius in Somalia who has a high level of raw intelligence will do horrible on an I.Q test if they get shafted in basic education. You can’t even fully apply your intelligence without education, that stuff is very, very important.
So those of having a better socioeconomic background have better access to educational, social and nutritional resources. They will be able to nurture their raw intelligence better and perform better. Or practice doing I.Q tests and training themselves to do well on them.
Yes it does, from underwater welding to cybersecurity to flipping burgers require intelligence to attain or exercise those skills.
Cognition is everything. From your social behavior to technical competency.
Wonder why Kotick permitted this? For his sort, more is never enough. They’d greed the earth into the grave if they could, and are. I’d think he has something up his sleeve but the wealthy are typically dumb as a bag of rocks.
2 Likes