[waiseristy]

You should include the previous line on that second quote

>there is no plausible mechanism for systemic discrimination by the alleged wrongdoers. Lower-level managers...

If the suit is about systematic bias, this seems to be a pretty good line of reasoning. Complete chaos in compensation outcomes == no bias, or at least if there is, it's probably not coming from the top down

[username90]

Right, you can protect yourself against charges by just delegating all discrimination to low level managers. You don't have to tell them to discriminate, they do that all on their own!

But seriously, if you can't pin that kind of discrimination on upper managers you will never be able to root it out.

[User23]

There are plenty of Silicon Valley companies where South Asian upper management near exclusively hires South Asian engineers

[dietr1ch]

I think it's a language thing, were they are indeed more productive if they use their native languages at work. It's a tough situation because there's already regulation against enforcing a language in the workplace.

[alisonkisk]

What? My company conducts business in English by policy.

[trhway]

>if you can't pin <> on upper managers you will never be able to root it out.

that how mafia works :) An that is how Uber broke local governments medalion control.

[waiseristy]

Oh totally, this is a perfect example of the dissolution of responsibility that corporations are known for. It's obviously more difficult to attack the 5,000 headed low-level hydra, so that's where the "controversial" decisions get made. Genius!

[alisonkisk]

No.

"Systemic" means a problem throughout the system, regardless of design. For example, systemic infection.

"Systematic" means creating a plan or system to do it.

"Disparate impact" is a legal theory for proving systemic discrimination.