Speaking as a racially and sexually biased white male (yes, I admit it and no I'm not planning on changing it either because I have good reasons to be biased), this shit still happens because people keep hiring idiots but it seems in middle and upper management, they are very reluctant to fire them once the truth comes out.
I can't comment on whether this payment discrepancy was really race related. It seems to be too stupid of a move to be this simple. However the man was right:
"I can't comment on whether this payment discrepancy was really race related. It seems to be too stupid of a move to be this simple. However the man was right: There was NO WAY for anyone to come to any other conclusion than he was paid less because he's black. Wrong or right conclusion doesn't even matter."
Since there's not a "me too" button, here I am answering you with an "exactly that".
Maybe because I'm not American, I have trouble to even understand racism (people is people, right?) which, of course, doesn't preclude me from being racist even without my own knwoledge, but that's a different issue... anyway, it seems too simple the outright explanation that someone, two or three levels above on the corporate ladder, so most possibly basically didn't know the guy, decides, "hey, this guy is black, there's no way he's gonna get the same comission than this other white man", specially when we consider it was not the upper manager's money, but IBM's, to start with.
Nevertheless, USA is USA and their views on minorities are well known so, even if the black guy happened to be the kind of sociopath that cleverly covers his tracks and it was some other circumstances completely unrelated to race what motivated the difference in comissions, -well, *specially* if he's the kind of sociopath that cleverly covers his tracks, unless you have a very clear paper trail you *positively* know what will happen so... what kind of imbecile would not accept he has the upper hand this time, and even if you also happen to be a sociopath (you are in upper management, so you most possibly are) plan a a revenge with at least a chance to success?
Maybe is the old saying: "don't attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"
"Your comment makes no sense. It tries to denigrate the victim and is a rambling word salad that Trump would be proud of."
No, it doesn't. What I'm saying is that *even* if that were the case, that the black guy fully deserved the lower comission, it still wouldn't make any sense trying to stand on such an obviously losing position, so much moreso if, as it's more possible, that wasn't the case.
The best way to avoid responsibility is to say, "I've got responsibilities."
Big Blue made a big boo-boo (Score:5, Insightful)
How is this crap still happening?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That's a very good question.
Speaking as a racially and sexually biased white male (yes, I admit it and no I'm not planning on changing it either because I have good reasons to be biased), this shit still happens because people keep hiring idiots but it seems in middle and upper management, they are very reluctant to fire them once the truth comes out.
I can't comment on whether this payment discrepancy was really race related. It seems to be too stupid of a move to be this simple. However the man was right:
Re:Big Blue made a big boo-boo (Score:2)
"I can't comment on whether this payment discrepancy was really race related. It seems to be too stupid of a move to be this simple. However the man was right: There was NO WAY for anyone to come to any other conclusion than he was paid less because he's black. Wrong or right conclusion doesn't even matter."
Since there's not a "me too" button, here I am answering you with an "exactly that".
Maybe because I'm not American, I have trouble to even understand racism (people is people, right?) which, of course, doesn't preclude me from being racist even without my own knwoledge, but that's a different issue... anyway, it seems too simple the outright explanation that someone, two or three levels above on the corporate ladder, so most possibly basically didn't know the guy, decides, "hey, this guy is black, there's no way he's gonna get the same comission than this other white man", specially when we consider it was not the upper manager's money, but IBM's, to start with.
Nevertheless, USA is USA and their views on minorities are well known so, even if the black guy happened to be the kind of sociopath that cleverly covers his tracks and it was some other circumstances completely unrelated to race what motivated the difference in comissions, -well, *specially* if he's the kind of sociopath that cleverly covers his tracks, unless you have a very clear paper trail you *positively* know what will happen so... what kind of imbecile would not accept he has the upper hand this time, and even if you also happen to be a sociopath (you are in upper management, so you most possibly are) plan a a revenge with at least a chance to success?
Maybe is the old saying: "don't attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"
Re: (Score:2)
"Your comment makes no sense. It tries to denigrate the victim and is a rambling word salad that Trump would be proud of."
No, it doesn't. What I'm saying is that *even* if that were the case, that the black guy fully deserved the lower comission, it still wouldn't make any sense trying to stand on such an obviously losing position, so much moreso if, as it's more possible, that wasn't the case.