For a company so focused on the “Diversity and Inclusion” trope [1] this seems highly hypocritical of Mozilla. I would really like it for them to spell it out what DEI means for them, because, it’s clear it’s not about being inclusive with people like Steve Teixeira.
I hope Steve wins the case in the courts and receives a hefty compensation that includes Mozilla paying for all his medical expenses and several years of wages.
Interesting detail, in my experience DEI is only for Americans. They still haven't been arsed to do simple stuff to "include" other cultures. Like localisation.
DEI is also used by FAANG in India to hire mostly women graduates. There has been reports of campus hiring drives of these companies hiring 80% girls.
A popular conspiracy is that since these companies have to fulfil some amount of diversity quota, they hire mostly graduate girls in India, since that's cheaper than hiring "diverse" candidates in USA or EU. Don't know how true it is.
Interestingly there's no other "diversity" other than gender diversity talked by Indian hiring managers.
While I cannot speak to the truth of the matter, if it so much as brings in an extra penny, they will do it. Nigh, they are obligated to do it. These companies hold more wealth and power than many nation states. At least in the US, law and regulation has been wholly captured by those with said wealth and power. We no sooner live in a democracy than I am Marry Poppins. How can we expect a company like Mozilla to have even a smidge of ethics when they are funded by the same company that somehow made "Don't be evil" a meme. I used to be proud to work in tech. To be a software developer. Now I am disgusted at all the things I have contributed to in the name of progress and profit.
As a general rule, DEI proponents forget that a lot of the authoritarianism around speech and specific desired social behaviour directly interferes with severely autistic people.
Often the people who are fervently in favour of DEI initiatives (rather than in a relaxed way, like ordinary people who wish for equity and inclusion) will make the accommodations only if that person is labelled, diagnosed and if they don't behave “like an asshole”.
The annoying thing is that Autism itself is a disorder, largely because the people suffering find it difficult to follow social cues, steer away from taboo subjects and are largely “too honest”. Which to people who did not grow up with Autists (I did) will seem like they’re “being assholes”.
I find this to be the highest form of hypocrisy, as disorders such as high levels of autism are expressly considered a part of DEI initiatives and DEI branding, and some fervent DEI supporters will cosplay Autism- when in reality, like all people, they’re on the spectrum but not severely impacted.
I find it hard to take this group seriously when they so blatantly disregard broader, universal, accommodations around reading speech charitably to include people so supposedly core to their endeavours.
Sidenote: Often those who are loudest here are the least likely to try to understand; I’m 100% certain they will downvote this rather than telling me I am wrong, because I’m not wrong and it makes them uncomfortable.
It feels like those with ASD who aren't severe are forgotten about, or maybe it's because I seem semi-"normal" I just tend to be hit with the "asshole" label for being clueless about whatever stuff normal people do that I don't. I am having tons of trouble now with job searching because I have no idea what to do, socially, to improve my network, and it seems like that's literally all that matters these days. I don't know if other people who are not severely disabled with ASD have the same problems as me or not, so maybe I just am an asshole!
I don't know what DEI training is like elsewhere, but where I work the focus is on hiring the most qualified person for the job, and making sure that ones biases don't get in the way of that.
I've come to find that the best people are the guys who say "good afternoon" and "god bless you" to me when we're just randomly passing each other down the grocery aisle. Small things that might brighten someone's day; I do my best to return the favour and pay it forward too. It really does cost nothing to be nice.
On the other hand, I've come to find the people who scream about discrimination and equity and other nonsense are almost always the most discriminatory and unfair individuals. Utter hypocrisy.
Is your argument that organizations should not have a work place anti-discrimination policy and enforcement, because proponents of such policies are all bad people and we should just trust in inherent human kindness? Are you advocating that people do not speak up about discrimination? I am not sure what you are advocating?
spicymaki's comment is just pointing out how some people who talk big about equality can be pretty crappy themselves, which kinda makes it hard to take them seriously.
We definitely need rules against discrimination at work and ways to deal with it when it happens. People should absolutely speak up if they see or experience discrimination.
But the thing is, real kindness and respect should be at the heart of all this. We need both the rules and people actually being decent to each other. It's not one or the other, it's both; hence the false dichotomy.
I'm not sure how much clearer I can be about it: The more loudly someone complains about racism, the more likely they are racist. Likewise the other -ists and -isms.
I hope Steve wins the case in the courts and receives a hefty compensation that includes Mozilla paying for all his medical expenses and several years of wages.
[1] https://blog.mozilla.org/careers/