PDA

View Full Version : Lesbian Files Sexual Orientation Discrimination Lawsuit Agai...


MacBytes
May 21, 2005, 11:27 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Lesbian Files Sexual Orientation Discrimination Lawsuit Against Apple Computer (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050522002729)

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

mkrishnan
May 21, 2005, 11:36 PM
Out of curiosity, when did lesbian start getting capitalized? :)

Seriously, this seems somewhat difficult to defend, coming from a corporate memo....

"rather obese-sized black lesbian."

Daveway
May 21, 2005, 11:41 PM
Ha. I'm sure my favorite lesbian....Madge Weinstein, will give us a thorough breakdown tomorrow.

Apple has this huge ego of having attractive people, it almost reminds me of Hitler.

Bob Knob
May 21, 2005, 11:53 PM
Interesting that it says:
Patterson alleges that one of Apple's managers wrote a memo describing her as a "rather obese-sized black lesbian."

It doesn't say she has the memo, unless she has the memo it's a case of "he said she said".

swingerofbirch
May 21, 2005, 11:58 PM
This will hurt Apple's 100% rating by the HRC organization, and if these allegations are true, it should rightfully hurt Apple.

And yes I also was laughing that lesbian was capitalized. Why do they even say it like that? Would you ever hear: "Today a straight came into work and......"? Couldn't they say a woman has filed suit over sexual orientation discrimination?

In other news, I noticed a new iTunes commercial during SNL but I couldn't pay attention because a Spaniard was talking my ear off :cool: :eek:

Kagetenshi
May 22, 2005, 12:27 AM
Out of curiosity, when did lesbian start getting capitalized? :)
It always has been. Trick is, in contrast with little-l lesbian, a Lesbian comes from the Isle of Lesbos and can be of any gender or sexual orientation.

~J

mad jew
May 22, 2005, 12:36 AM
And yes I also was laughing that lesbian was capitalized. Why do they even say it like that? Would you ever hear: "Today a straight came into work and......"? Couldn't they say a woman has filed suit over sexual orientation discrimination?


Because which choice of words will get the most hits? It's just a mild form of sensationalist journalism. :(

PlaceofDis
May 22, 2005, 12:39 AM
woohoo! more work for Apple's Legal Team! :cool:

mkrishnan
May 22, 2005, 12:51 AM
It always has been. Trick is, in contrast with little-l lesbian, a Lesbian comes from the Isle of Lesbos and can be of any gender or sexual orientation.

Yes, I actually did know that piece of trivia. But I don't think this woman is from the Isle of Lesbos, is she?

PlaceofDis
May 22, 2005, 12:56 AM
i know that i really shouldn't make light of these things though, this seriously could have a huge impact on Apple, and in many other areas as well. One thing i wondered about though was the salery difference. isn't that supposed to be confidential between workers and only the boss knows who gets paid what? thats what i have always been led to believe although i could be wrong.

Mindcrime
May 22, 2005, 01:18 AM
This lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco, may be one of the largest discrimination lawsuits filed against Apple Computer by a Lesbian.

This is funny. It makes it sound like a habitual thing for Apple to be sued by lesbians. And as Kagetenshi mentioned, the capital 'L' makes one think of the people of Lesbos rather than the ladies of the sexual orientation. The article writer is a noob journalist, I guess.

"In other news, all sixteen citizens of the Isle of Lesbos are suing Apple for discrimination. Apparently the hip manufacturer of the iPod and the iMac computer failed to include a Lesbian input method under its flagship operating system's International Preferences."

mkrishnan
May 22, 2005, 01:19 AM
Lesbian input method

Nice! :D

Nickygoat
May 22, 2005, 02:29 AM
woohoo! more work for Apple's Legal Team! :cool:
They must be bored after the kicking they gave Thinksecret - or maybe they just want a free holiday in Greece, digging up dirt

macnulty
May 22, 2005, 08:38 AM
I like the phrase "genetic characteristic discrimination". Pretty much covers it all. It is an example of poor language skills that seems to be prevalent among journalists.

mklos
May 22, 2005, 09:25 AM
Its probably just some bitch that couldn't perform her job so Apple fired her. Then she found out that Apple had $7 Billion so she thought she'd sue Apple to get some. I'm sooooooooo sick of people doing that in this day and age.

mkrishnan
May 22, 2005, 11:12 AM
I like the phrase "genetic characteristic discrimination". Pretty much covers it all. It is an example of poor language skills that seems to be prevalent among journalists.

Or more likely a prerequisite for extortionist lawyers. ;)

DickArmAndHarT
May 22, 2005, 11:44 AM
Its probably just some bitch that couldn't perform her job so Apple fired her. Then she found out that Apple had $7 Billion so she thought she'd sue Apple to get some. I'm sooooooooo sick of people doing that in this day and age.


I agree, unless she has a copy of this memo, there is no case, and she threw in everything she could think of. Being discrminated against for being of color, sexual orientation, and weight.

Dr.Gargoyle
May 22, 2005, 12:17 PM
I agree, unless she has a copy of this memo, there is no case, and she threw in everything she could think of. Being discrminated against for being of color, sexual orientation, and weight.
If she had a copy of the memo, this would never had surface. Apple would have paid up, fired the guy that wrote the memo, and that would have been the end of the story.
My guess is that Apple stand to lose much more money in PR loses than what an settlement would have costed then, if this woman would be able to present the memo at the trial. Since this apparently is going to court, she probably haven't got the memo.
We probably have a case of she said he said, where the lawyers of the woman are trying to make as much waves as possible hoping that Apple is going to cave in.

NAG
May 22, 2005, 01:35 PM
If she had a copy of the memo, this would never had surface. Apple would have paid up, fired the guy that wrote the memo, and that would have been the end of the story.
My guess is that Apple stand to lose much more money in PR loses than what an settlement would have costed then, if this woman would be able to present the memo at the trial. Since this apparently is going to court, she probably haven't got the memo.
We probably have a case of she said he said, where the lawyers of the woman are trying to make as much waves as possible hoping that Apple is going to cave in.
Indeed. I doubt they have anything. If she does have the memo, then I have no idea what Apple is thinking.

calyxman
May 22, 2005, 01:35 PM
Did they say if she uses Windows now?

montex
May 22, 2005, 02:24 PM
I've never understood why describing a woman for exactly what she is should be grounds for a lawsuit. Take the quote "rather obese-sized black lesbian." and ask yourself why it is wrong to use this description? Is the woman in question obese? If she is more than 25% over her ideal weight, she is. Is she black? Maybe African American would have been more politically correct, but I know of no negative connotation in using the word black. And if she is a lesbian, why should it be wrong to call her that? The word lesbian has no negative meaning as far as I can tell.

But we are now supposed to believe that calling a woman who is a "rather obese-sized black lesbian" exactly that should be grounds for a million dollar lawsuit. According to this logic, there is absolutely no difference between "rather obese-sized black lesbian" and "fat-pig, ni**er dyke".

If I were a business owner I wouldn't hire women at all. There is simply too much of a risk of offending them and finding yourself in a frivolous lawsuit like this one. The message to corporate America is that you risk your companies future by hiring women and minorities. Nice going ladies!

Kagetenshi
May 22, 2005, 02:35 PM
I can see the argument against description based on sexual orientation because while you can look in a room and identify who is black, and you can usually look in a room and identify who is moderately obese, you cannot with any conclusiveness look in a room and identify who is a lesbian. It's an unnecessary detail.

~J

PlaceofDis
May 22, 2005, 02:36 PM
I've never understood why describing a woman for exactly what she is should be grounds for a lawsuit. Take the quote "rather obese-sized black lesbian." and ask yourself why it is wrong to use this description? Is the woman in question obese? If she is more than 25% over her ideal weight, she is. Is she black? Maybe African American would have been more politically correct, but I know of no negative connotation in using the word black. And if she is a lesbian, why should it be wrong to call her that? The word lesbian has no negative meaning as far as I can tell.

But we are now supposed to believe that calling a woman who is a "rather obese-sized black lesbian" exactly that should be grounds for a million dollar lawsuit. According to this logic, there is absolutely no difference between "rather obese-sized black lesbian" and "fat-pig, ni**er dyke".

If I were a business owner I wouldn't hire women at all. There is simply too much of a risk of offending them and finding yourself in a frivolous lawsuit like this one. The message to corporate America is that you risk your companies future by hiring women and minorities. Nice going ladies!

i agree that there is nothing wrong with describing people just the way they are. thats fine. but it all depends upon contex and the reason why you are describing this person. if there is no reason to then in a corporate atmosphere you shouldn't be. there should be a solid reasoning behind why these terms are being used in the first place, otherwise a personal description of a person has no bearing or weight on any matter unless its derrogatorry

my .02

tj53
May 22, 2005, 02:57 PM
If she had a copy of the memo, this would never had surface. Apple would have paid up, fired the guy that wrote the memo, and that would have been the end of the story.
My guess is that Apple stand to lose much more money in PR loses than what an settlement would have costed then, if this woman would be able to present the memo at the trial. Since this apparently is going to court, she probably haven't got the memo.
We probably have a case of she said he said, where the lawyers of the woman are trying to make as much waves as possible hoping that Apple is going to cave in.

It would have hurt Apple either way. If they had just settled than it would eventually leak out that they made the settlement regarding sexual discrimination, or should I say genetic discrimination? and it would have been just as bad. Same as the recent Wendy's thing, the company gets hurt either way.

asif786
May 22, 2005, 03:04 PM
wow, this sounds typically like apple to me. it wouldnt suprise me at all if this memo surfaced. numerous people have said that apple has some of the worst corporate politics in the corporate world.

also, with regards to settlement, do you *have* to settle? some people do actually have principles and will take the matter through the courts no matter how much money they're offered.

and if anyone thinks apple/steve jobs is squeaky clean, read apple confidential, the second coming of SJ, or iCon. you'll learn that mr. jobs isn't a saint at all.

Dr.Gargoyle
May 22, 2005, 03:28 PM
I've never understood why describing a woman for exactly what she is should be grounds for a lawsuit. Take the quote "rather obese-sized black lesbian." and ask yourself why it is wrong to use this description? Is the woman in question obese? If she is more than 25% over her ideal weight, she is. Is she black? Maybe African American would have been more politically correct, but I know of no negative connotation in using the word black. And if she is a lesbian, why should it be wrong to call her that? The word lesbian has no negative meaning as far as I can tell.

But we are now supposed to believe that calling a woman who is a "rather obese-sized black lesbian" exactly that should be grounds for a million dollar lawsuit. According to this logic, there is absolutely no difference between "rather obese-sized black lesbian" and "fat-pig, ni**er dyke".
We live in the age of political correctness, where any word hinting a negative connotation, regardless how vague it is, is a ground for a lawsuit. We seem to disqualify word after word, due to some hysterically need to be political correct.
How in earths name can black, lesbian, or obese be regarded as racial/bigot slur??? Isn't it about time we reclaim these words that has been taken from us and instead act as if we believed all people are equal?
If I were a business owner I wouldn't hire women at all. There is simply too much of a risk of offending them and finding yourself in a frivolous lawsuit like this one. The message to corporate America is that you risk your companies future by hiring women and minorities. Nice going ladies!
I don't agree at all. I do believe you are able to find this bahavior in any distinguishable religious/ethnicity/sexual group.
Frivolus lawsuits has become a way to support yourself.

Kagetenshi
May 22, 2005, 03:29 PM
wow, this sounds typically like apple to me. it wouldnt suprise me at all if this memo surfaced. numerous people have said that apple has some of the worst corporate politics in the corporate world.
And numerous people have said that you're a serial rapist. Welcome to the world of hearsay!

~J

Dr.Gargoyle
May 22, 2005, 03:42 PM
also, with regards to settlement, do you *have* to settle? some people do actually have principles and will take the matter through the courts no matter how much money they're offered.
You are correct. In fact some principles are even worth dying for.
However, do you really think being a "rather obese-sized black lesbian" is a principle worth fighting out in the court? In what way does this, unsensitive perhaps, phrase constitute a principle worth fighting for? What would the objective be?
What we have are some adjectives stapled on each other that it hardly can be regarded as slander nor slur.

Dr.Gargoyle
May 22, 2005, 03:45 PM
It would have hurt Apple either way. If they had just settled than it would eventually leak out that they made the settlement regarding sexual discrimination, or should I say genetic discrimination? and it would have been just as bad. Same as the recent Wendy's thing, the company gets hurt either way.
You want to minimize the bad publicity. Compare the jackson trial. It is common knowledge that he has out of court settlements before. Being exposed in media everday is a totally different ballpark. The PR loss he is suffering now is unrepairable. If you dont believe me, consider OJ Simpson. I doubt you will see him in a commercial any time soon.

asif786
May 22, 2005, 04:07 PM
And numerous people have said that you're a serial rapist. Welcome to the world of hearsay!

~J

it's a common fact that everybody knows. i've heard first hand accounts of people being fired at apple for stupid reasons. it's been published in books. you would call it hearsay if a few people were saying it, not when lots of people are and it's been publically published. if these books contained lies, they would be sued/pulled off the shelves.

whatever, anyway. there's politics at apple. whether this woman is telling the truth or not we may never know.

Dr.Gargoyle
May 22, 2005, 04:13 PM
it's a common fact that everybody knows. i've heard first hand accounts of people being fired at apple for stupid reasons.
Would these reasons be that they weren't attractive enough????? I doubt any company would survive for long if they had that policy.
Most people look for competence when they want to do business with a company. Unless you run a stripjoint, I doubt it would be a good strategy to fire people from how they appear. I am under the impression that most people gets fired for what they do, or don't do, than for their religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation.

paulypants
May 22, 2005, 04:20 PM
Just another "victim" in our society of "victims"

yaaaaaawwwwnnn

maximumbarkly
May 22, 2005, 04:42 PM
note that she tacked on charges as the lawsuit continued. that she was also suspended for a reason not explained (at least not yet or very well). this lawsuit sounds more opportunist than necessary.


i dont quite care if steve jobs runs a facist corporation. He's still the reason why apple is doing so well right now. if thats the way it needs to be done, let it be done that way.

personally, i think she was suspended for not working hard enough on our powerbook G5's.

...sorry.

montex
May 22, 2005, 04:54 PM
Ok, let's suppose that the offending memo is found to contain the phrase "rather obese-sized black lesbian". What does this mean? Is it proof that Apple Computer Inc. is biased against these people? Since when does any single memo written by any mid-level manager constitute an edict from the top? Any one of thousands of Apple employees can write a memo. It doesn't mean that they speak for the whole company.

Now if it was Steve Jobs who wrote the memo, that would be a different story. As it is we have no idea why this woman fired. All we know for sure is that she is crying racism, sexism, homophobia and fat-cow-ism. Though I'm not sure if that last one is a protected class...

/moo

wdlove
May 22, 2005, 05:12 PM
There are usually two sides to every story. So we will have to wait and see how this plays out it the court. All of these lawsuits causes me to be a little cynical.

Dr.Gargoyle
May 22, 2005, 05:45 PM
Ok, let's suppose that the offending memo is found to contain the phrase "rather obese-sized black lesbian". What does this mean? Is it proof that Apple Computer Inc. is biased against these people? Since when does any single memo written by any mid-level manager constitute an edict from the top? Any one of thousands of Apple employees can write a memo. It doesn't mean that they speak for the whole company.

Now if it was Steve Jobs who wrote the memo, that would be a different story. As it is we have no idea why this woman fired. All we know for sure is that she is crying racism, sexism, homophobia and fat-cow-ism. Though I'm not sure if that last one is a protected class...

/moo
I couldn't agree more.
However, I believe that Apple probably would try to settle, given the woman have the memo and this comment was made made by a senior manager. (not saying a "rather obese-sized black lesbian" is bigot, but it is possible to sue a company for not dealing with a bigot environment.)
Consequently, from a strictly business aspect, I think Apple would be accept the loss and settle given the above. You would lose much more money if let this valse around in media.
Since we read about it here, it looks like the ladies lawyers are betting on the same thing; Make as much waves as possible and hope Apple will settle.
It is just a dirty game of chicken.

kettle
May 22, 2005, 05:58 PM
I didn't think that thin Lesbians were completely lesbian.... or is that just an urban legend?

mklos
May 22, 2005, 06:04 PM
wow, this sounds typically like apple to me. it wouldnt suprise me at all if this memo surfaced. numerous people have said that apple has some of the worst corporate politics in the corporate world.

also, with regards to settlement, do you *have* to settle? some people do actually have principles and will take the matter through the courts no matter how much money they're offered.

and if anyone thinks apple/steve jobs is squeaky clean, read apple confidential, the second coming of SJ, or iCon. you'll learn that mr. jobs isn't a saint at all.

Steve Jobs is a genuine perfectionist. If you work for him and you're not a perfectionist, then he'll shitcan you. IMO, thats true in any position at any company. Why do you think almost everything that Apple introduces is pretty much the best in that particular category. I have a feeling that this is a genuine example of people taking advantage of other people just for the bad publicity and the money.

There's no absolute proof of this note, except for what someone said. Like someone noted, anyone can write a note, forge the signature and create a story. This is exactly the thing that pisses me off about this kind of crap. People find that someone has money and they find the slightest little thing to sue them over. This is what costs Apple hundreds of millions of dollars every year. This is why prices of Apple products don't really go down in prices. ********s like her sue, and who pays for it, Apple's loyal customers do with higher prices than the competition. Now I know there are other reasons why Apple products are expensive, but this is also one. Its one that can be avoided in the future.

sourcemonkey
May 22, 2005, 07:01 PM
i know that i really shouldn't make light of these things though, this seriously could have a huge impact on Apple, and in many other areas as well. One thing i wondered about though was the salery difference. isn't that supposed to be confidential between workers and only the boss knows who gets paid what? thats what i have always been led to believe although i could be wrong.

Following on from this, i also found it strange how someone in a 'higher post' can have been earning a lower salary.

Not only that, but I also found it odd that the article read:

... [this] may be one of the largest discrimination lawsuits filed against Apple Computer by a Lesbian.

This, to me, implies that there is some significant history of lesbians suing Apple. The words "may be" also adds to this. is this true?

why capitalise lesbian?! god its just too much. :confused: :D

mkrishnan
May 22, 2005, 07:12 PM
Following on from this, i also found it strange how someone in a 'higher post' can have been earning a lower salary.

I don't specifically know about Apple, but that does frequently happen. At large automotive industry companies at which I worked, it was common that the salary bands for the highest-ranking functional employees, for instance, overlapped with the bands for the lowest-ranking first level managers, and that the highest first-level managers overlapped the lowest second, etc.... Usually it happens in part as a result of salary inflation forces -- when salary competitiveness for an engineer, for instance, causes the salaries to get very high very quickly, those engineers will walk through the system with that starting salary, and if they become managers, will get a salary increase when they enter the managerial bands as a % of what they made before. But engineers who went through the same process in an earlier year when those forces were not so strong will start with lower salaries and so could also become managers and receive raises, but have those raises be smaller. Likewise a manager could be from a different functional background altogether from her/his employees and that could cause different market pressures to apply.

Then above and beyond that is the spreading HR idea in some larger corporations that salaries for hiring at any given level are purely based on market forces at that level, and that there's no corporate responsibility to maintain a pay hierarchy. Which usually just means higher executives screwing middle management. ;)

iMeowbot
May 22, 2005, 07:50 PM
This, to me, implies that there is some significant history of lesbians suing Apple. The words "may be" also adds to this. is this true?

why capitalise lesbian?! god its just too much. :confused: :D
Well, it is a press release from some law office, and they even went and put their name in ALL CAPS, so I wouldn't rule out the possibility that this is a little more about self-promotion than, say, merely informing the public of some issue.

Dr.Gargoyle
May 22, 2005, 07:52 PM
Well, it is a press release from some law office, and they even went and put their name in ALL CAPS, so I wouldn't rule out the possibility that this is a little more about self-promotion than, say, merely informing the public of some issue.
you don't say... ;)

sourcemonkey
May 22, 2005, 08:27 PM
I don't specifically know about Apple, but that does frequently happen. At large automotive industry companies at which I worked, it was common that the salary bands for the highest-ranking functional employees, for instance, overlapped with the bands for the lowest-ranking first level managers, and that the highest first-level managers overlapped the lowest second, etc.... Usually it happens in part as a result of salary inflation forces -- when salary competitiveness for an engineer, for instance, causes the salaries to get very high very quickly, those engineers will walk through the system with that starting salary, and if they become managers, will get a salary increase when they enter the managerial bands as a % of what they made before. But engineers who went through the same process in an earlier year when those forces were not so strong will start with lower salaries and so could also become managers and receive raises, but have those raises be smaller. Likewise a manager could be from a different functional background altogether from her/his employees and that could cause different market pressures to apply.

Then above and beyond that is the spreading HR idea in some larger corporations that salaries for hiring at any given level are purely based on market forces at that level, and that there's no corporate responsibility to maintain a pay hierarchy. Which usually just means higher executives screwing middle management. ;)

Thanks Mohan, that does infact make perfect sense (i guess i typed before i thought). :o :D

broken_keyboard
May 22, 2005, 10:38 PM
I doubt she was fired for the reasons she claimed. Companies just don't fire people for such stupid reasons. More likely she had a bad attitude or bossy personality.

People who file lawsuits like this which are them found to be groundless should have to pay all costs incurred by the defendant. That would lessen the number.

TheWama
May 23, 2005, 12:01 AM
People who file lawsuits like this which are them found to be groundless should have to pay all costs incurred by the defendant. That would lessen the number.Hell Yes, a loser-pays legal system (in civil litigation particularly) would go a *long* way toward preventing unfair litigation. People and companies can be forced to spend their money on lawyers and have the reputations wrecked, all without penalty to the lawsuit-bringer. On top of that, there's a good chance an embattled company will settle just to avoid the heat. I'm sick of people who get what they deserve doing this stuff to innocent people.

That said, there's no certain way to know that this case is an example of the above. I just suspect that it is.

More from "Overlawyered.com" (http://www.overlawyered.com/topics/lpays.html)

Duff-Man
May 23, 2005, 12:41 AM
Duff-Man says....I don't usually wade into these somewhat "political" issues but to me it seems that this is more than likely just one of those typical frivolous lawsuits that is all too common is the USA these days. Apple is a very large company and is well aware that they cannot just fire employees without just cause...I would be *very* surprised if this really went anywhere and I hope Apple does not just pay this loser off to try and bury the story...expose it for what it is....oh yeah!

fraggle
May 23, 2005, 02:40 AM
If I were a business owner I wouldn't hire women at all.

This is then another case of sexual discrimination :)

Abstract
May 23, 2005, 05:20 AM
I agree, unless she has a copy of this memo, there is no case, and she threw in everything she could think of. Being discrminated against for being of color, sexual orientation, and weight.

If she filed a complaint, and then she was suspended the next day, it looks suspicious and questions need to be asked. She was fired one month later after she served her suspension. Unless it comes out that her manager at Apple had discussed her poor attitude, or her poor work ethic, or her poor quality of work with her beforehand, getting a suspension and then getting fired seems a bit unnecessary.

And no, even if the description, "rather obese-sized black lesbian," was accurate, it seems rather unnecessary to provide any of that information, as people don't want to be seen or judged based on any of those things. Your sexual orientation, race, and weight is your business. You're an employee, and your work and attitude is what managers should "label" you by.

Personally, I'd find it rather unnecessary if I was called "the skinny chinese guy in Human Resources," but white folk don't really have that problem, so it doesn't matter to some. :rolleyes:

The lack of memo makes that part of her case look dodgy, though. But the stuff about being suspended and fired a day after she filed a complaint should be looked into, along with past reports and filings about her work ethic and conduct.

sakasune
May 23, 2005, 08:41 AM
but white folk don't really have that problem, so it doesn't matter to some.
I'm white and had the problem. When I worked at McDonald's a few years back, I was in the minority there. I was convinced this black manager (who was only a year or two older than me) hated me just because I was white. I didn't say more than five words to her before she acted like a total bitch to me. She loved everyone else, she made sure she treated the other crew nice when I was around, she would send me home for no reason, etc, etc... I couldn't work with her at all, I had the general manager make the schedule where we didn't overlap for more than an hour.

Now I'm pissed off about this whole thing again... :mad:

Paul O'Keefe
May 23, 2005, 09:22 AM
She has a case based on that she gets paid less then the people working underneath her and that she was suspended/terminated for bringing that up. And if any of this is based on her being fat, black, or lesbian then apple rightlyfully needs to pay damages with a significant penalty attached.

Expect this to be settled.

RugoseCone
May 23, 2005, 10:05 AM
Apple has this huge ego of having attractive people, it almost reminds me of Hitler.

Clearly you haven't worked with many people from Apple. I can't say I've experienced very many "attractive" people there. The stores don't count BTW.

montex
May 23, 2005, 12:31 PM
This is then another case of sexual discrimination :)

You are absolutely correct. But then, what do you expect? Every time a woman or other minority sues an employer, it is a slap in the face to that employer. After a while, you have to look at the groups which are most likely to sue for any reason and avoid them. Put it this way, how many times do you have to get burned before you pull your hand away from the fire?

Of course, you have to come up with some BS about why the applicant was rejected and or fired, but in the long run you continue to employ the good people who are not trying to screw your company. And in the long run, that is better for society as a whole.

/hey it's a**hole monday!

Ugg
May 23, 2005, 12:54 PM
I can see the argument against description based on sexual orientation because while you can look in a room and identify who is black, and you can usually look in a room and identify who is moderately obese, you cannot with any conclusiveness look in a room and identify who is a lesbian. It's an unnecessary detail.

~J

I disagree in that she is claiming discrimination based on her being a lesbian. If her lawsuit was based on the fact that she was discriminated against for being dyslexic and her code kept crashing the computer, then "black, obese lesbian" would be gratuitous.

Ugg
May 23, 2005, 12:59 PM
I didn't think that thin Lesbians were completely lesbian.... or is that just an urban legend?


Where have you been? Lesbians come in all shapes and sizes these days, just as all gay men aren't muscle bound sex hounds. Nothing like stereotypes to define a subculture.

Kagetenshi
May 23, 2005, 01:00 PM
Er? I think you misunderstood: what I'm saying is that I can understand taking exception to descriptions that are, well, non-descriptive (won't help you pick someone out of a room by sight), because they're extraneous.

~J

24C
May 23, 2005, 03:44 PM
Is it just me...but she worked for Apple in the Human Resources Compensation Department... so what sort of compensation did she authorise? Is Apple that mismanaged that it has a department to sort out 'bad memos'? Either way she couldn't have been that good to be suspended and terminated, in my experience it's unusual for the good guys to be sidelined and if you are a black obese Lesbian and subject of gossip or a memo describing you as such and then find this objectionable, you should by now have a big chin, thick skin or at the very least asked "God" for different parentage! :D

kettle
May 23, 2005, 03:50 PM
Where have you been? Lesbians come in all shapes and sizes these days, just as all gay men aren't muscle bound sex hounds. Nothing like stereotypes to define a subculture.

I wonder if you are being dryer than I was?

I think you should have read it from the point of view which asks that maybe the fat lesbian gets less opportunity to test their attractions with the opposite sex.

...whichever way you interpret my trolling you should take it with a very large pinch of salt

btw, I thought all gay men minced about like graham norton.

24C
May 23, 2005, 05:18 PM
...snip...btw, I thought all gay men minced about like graham norton.I could say "don't judge everybody by your own standards", but I know you are joking with this comment or definitely trolling for a hit. ;)

mkrishnan
May 23, 2005, 05:38 PM
Is it just me...but she worked for Apple in the Human Resources Compensation Department... so what sort of compensation did she authorise? Is Apple that mismanaged that it has a department to sort out 'bad memos'?

Usually compensation consultants are involved in either developing salary grade systems, determining how compensation compares to the industry, etc. Sometimes in developing compensation paackages for executives, where it gets really complicated. Usually they don't authorize their own compensation, though, AFAIK! :eek: ;)

Chip NoVaMac
May 26, 2005, 01:12 AM
This will hurt Apple's 100% rating by the HRC organization, and if these allegations are true, it should rightfully hurt Apple.

And yes I also was laughing that lesbian was capitalized. Why do they even say it like that? Would you ever hear: "Today a straight came into work and......"? Couldn't they say a woman has filed suit over sexual orientation discrimination?

In other news, I noticed a new iTunes commercial during SNL but I couldn't pay attention because a Spaniard was talking my ear off :cool: :eek:

Given her past lawsuit, it seems that she attracts issues that causes her to feel that a lawsuit is needed.