[wyager]

Companies aren't doing DEI because they feel like it. They're doing it because if they don't, they will be punished by the state. The way this works is that there is a patronage relationship between the grievance HR class and certain political actors. If you fail to hire enough DEI HR people to suck revenue from your company, the state prosecutors hit you with all kinds of hiring discrimination lawsuits. It's sort of like a mob protection racket. You hire some of our guys for some no-show jobs, we don't burn your business down.

[pc86]

I can't even imagine what it must be like to live in this kind of contrived world.

[wyager]

What process do you use to select between world-models? I'm curious if you have a coherent answer here, or if you just can't accept what I'm describing because you don't like the way it sounds.

Do you know anything about employment law or the current state of title VII jurisprudence? I'm guessing not if you're reacting this way to a pretty uncontroversial claim.

[systemvoltage]

I kind of agree with OP. Lot of the D&I initiatives are CYA from lawsuits and we have built regulations so that D&I are instituted permanently by law.

I hope SCOTUS strikes all of this down.

[Glide]

I’m surprised I had to go down this far into the conversation before I saw someone bringing up legal liability.

[wyager]

I'm surprised at how negative the reaction to my explanation is. It's not even controversial to anyone who keeps track of the current state of title VII legal strategy.