Corporate Leftwing Policies In Danger Of Legal Action

[Rightguide]

Federal Commissioner: Supreme Court Ruling Will Crack Down on Corporations’ Left-Wing Programs​

By Jack Phillips
July 3, 2023Updated: July 3, 2023

Following last week’s landmark Supreme Court ruling targeting affirmative action at U.S. colleges, a top federal commissioner predicted that companies and corporations will see an increasing number of lawsuits over controversial left-wing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs; as well as the equally controversial environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) measures.

“I think this is going to be a wake-up call for employers,” Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Commissioner Andrea Lucas told Fox News last week. “Today is a time—the best time for lawyers to really take a really hard look at the lawfulness of their corporate diversity programs.”

“I have noticed an increasing number of challenges to corporate DEI programs and I would expect that this decision is going to shine even more of a spotlight on how out of alignment some of those programs are,” said Lucas, who was confirmed by the U.S. Senate in September 2020. “And to be clear, I’m not criticizing all diversity programs, it really depends on how they’re structured.”

“But to the extent that they’re explicitly or implicitly taking race into decision-making for employment decisions, race-restricted internships, race-restricted mentoring, race-focused promotion decisions, etc. There are a host of employment decisions,” Lucas continued to say in response to the case. “If you are using race as any factor in your decision-making, you’re already violating the law,” she added, “and I expect that you are going to have a rising amount of challenges as this sort of raises that issue back to people’s attention.”

More here: https://www.theepochtimes.com/feder...utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport

These companies deserve the kind of litigious hell about to be unleashed upon them.

 

[ll74]

Poor white guy

 

[schism666]

These companies deserve the kind of litigious hell about to be unleashed upon them.

i remember when you lot hated big government interfering with businesses. now, this... a call for big government interference.

 

[PaxNurgle]

So in other words, you would actually prefer to see some kind of Apartheid, or forced segregation put in place by the courts.

Yeah...okay...got it. NEWSFLASH: Apartheid is over. Jim Crow is over.

And the rest of us will stand up and make sure it STAYS over, corrupt activist courts be damned. If the courts were to rule in such a way, it will be further proof, as if any is needed, the the activist court system is corrupt and infiltrated by a white-nationalist agenda.

 

[icanhelp1]

So in other words, you would actually prefer to see some kind of Apartheid, or forced segregation put in place by the courts.

Yeah...okay...got it. NEWSFLASH: Apartheid is over. Jim Crow is over.

And the rest of us will stand up and make sure it STAYS over, corrupt activist courts be damned. If the courts were to rule in such a way, it will be further proof, as if any is needed, the the activist court system is corrupt and infiltrated by a white-nationalist agenda.

Easy Peezy, make decisions based on merit not race. Equality und the law.

 

[PaxNurgle]

The reason it's more complicated than that:

Let's just say that I'm Rightguide, and I'm hiring to staff my new start-up software development firm. My three leading candidates are: Vijay Mahmadhabutta, a software developer with 30 years of experience, Shaquiroquan Carter, who actually operated a start-up company for several years, and... Frank Earl Smith, two years out of high school, just got off probation, no experience in the field at all.

So, guess who I hire? Mr. Smith. Reason being, I have judged him to be "more qualified." Lets see Mr. Carter or Mr. Mahadhabutta prove otherwise. Because I'm Rightguide, and the courts have gone my way, neither of the other candidates will have a case.

 

[icanhelp1]

The reason it's more complicated than that:

Let's just say that I'm Rightguide, and I'm hiring to staff my new start-up software development firm. My three leading candidates are: Vijay Mahmadhabutta, a software developer with 30 years of experience, Shaquiroquan Carter, who actually operated a start-up company for several years, and... Frank Earl Smith, two years out of high school, just got off probation, no experience in the field at all.

So, guess who I hire? Mr. Smith. Reason being, I have judged him to be "more qualified." Lets see Mr. Carter or Mr. Mahadhabutta prove otherwise. Because I'm Rightguide, and the courts have gone my way, neither of the other candidates will have a case.

A company should hire based on the needs of the company not racial quotas. We don’t live in the sixties.

 

[PaxNurgle]

Well, like I said, I don't disagree but, as I said, It's more complicated than that. The reason I used Rightguide in the example I gave above, is that he would do exactly what I described- hire the less qualified candidate because of his race and not his qualifications. Should that be legal? You can say, well, affirmative action is actually reverse discrimination and I can understand that argument, but the reason it was initially implemented was to prevent the rightguides of this world from doing what they do- refusing to hire qualified people simply because of their race.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Lots and lots of jobs are really hard to quantify in meaningful ways at least not by looking at their resume instead of experiencing their work first hand anyhow.

 

[Chobham]

I'm waiting for the ESG lawsuits to start falling into place, and they will eventually.

 

[VinnyVeritas]

'Bout time...

 

[Chobham]

I'm waiting for a big class action suit to hit.

 

[ll74]

There is this one....is this what you mean?

Harvard sued over ‘overwhelmingly white’ legacy admissions

 

[Chobham]

No, I'm looking at the ESG crap. Hiring/admission policies involve individuals vs specific organizations/companies. ESG involves thousands of individuals and trillions of dollars.

 

[VinnyVeritas]

No, I'm looking at the ESG crap. Hiring/admission policies involve individuals vs specific organizations/companies. ESG involves thousands of individuals and trillions of dollars.

Mr. Irrelevant strikes again. Can Spidey be far behind?

 

[ll74]

Aah yes, my article on a lawsuit filed as a direct response to the SCOTUS ruling is totally irrelevant as opposed to the speculatove upcoming lawsuits that will herald in the republican wet dream of the death throes of affirmative action.

I see what you mean.

Please continue the expert predictive analysis. I'm sure.PJ has an article to quote in it's entirety

 

[Chobham]

The OP also mentions ESG. Perhaps you missed that.

 

[HisArpy]

The reason it's more complicated than that:

Let's just say that I'm Rightguide, and I'm hiring to staff my new start-up software development firm. My three leading candidates are: Vijay Mahmadhabutta, a software developer with 30 years of experience, Shaquiroquan Carter, who actually operated a start-up company for several years, and... Frank Earl Smith, two years out of high school, just got off probation, no experience in the field at all.

So, guess who I hire? Mr. Smith. Reason being, I have judged him to be "more qualified." Lets see Mr. Carter or Mr. Mahadhabutta prove otherwise. Because I'm Rightguide, and the courts have gone my way, neither of the other candidates will have a case.

Did you even consider that the first two of your "candidates" have proven track records of failure?

#1 has 30 years software development experience and he's looking for a job with an unproven startup? Why isn't he retired as a mega billionaire already?

#2 operated a startup for several years and is now looking for a new job? What happened to his old job?

Meanwhile, the ex-probation high school kid wants a job so he can earn enough money to buy a new car and maybe turn his life around to avoid returning to prison. Otherwise his only option is to back to his life of crime, drugs, and lecherous debauchery with low women.

Speaking of which... why aren't there any women on your candidate list? Misogyny much?