Mozilla's CPO Sues Over Discrimination Post-Cancer Diagnosis (theregister.com) 43
Thomas Claburn reports via The Register: Mozilla Corporation was sued this month in the US, along with three of its executives, for alleged disability discrimination and retaliation against Chief Product Officer Steve Teixeira. Teixeira, according to a complaint filed in King County Superior Court in the State of Washington, had been tapped to become CEO when he was diagnosed with ocular melanoma on October 3, 2023. Teixeira then took medical leave for cancer treatment from October 30, 2023, through February 1, 2024. "Immediately, upon his return, Mozilla campaigned to demote or terminate Mr Teixeira citing groundless concerns and assumptions about his capabilities as an individual living with cancer," the complaint [PDF] says. "Interim Chief Executive Officer Laura Chambers and Chief People Officer Dani Chehak were clear with Mr Teixeira: He could not continue as Chief Product Officer -- and could not continue as a Mozilla employee in any capacity beyond 2024 -- because of his diagnosis."
Chambers and Chehak are both named in the complaint, along with Mitchell Baker, the former CEO of Mozilla who stepped down in February and announced Chambers as her successor. "Mr Teixeira was enthusiastic to resume his critical role after treatment, but Mozilla would not tolerate an executive with cancer," said Amy Kangas Alexander, an attorney with law firm Stokes Lawrence who is representing the plaintiff, in an email to The Register. "When Mr Teixeira refused to be marginalized because of his disability, Mozilla retaliated and placed him on leave against his will. Mozilla has sidelined Mr Teixeira at the very moment he needs to be preparing his family for the possibility of a future without him."
The complaint claims that Teixeira, appointed in August 2022, helped reverse the decade-long decline of Firefox, which generates about 90 percent of Mozilla's revenue and is the company's only profitable product. He's further credited with growing Mozilla's advertising business, and AI capabilities, and with reducing investment in the money-losing Pocket service. These and other successes, it's alleged, led to conversation in September 2023 when Baker outlined a plan for Teixeira to become CEO. Then he took medical leave and before he could return, the complaint says, Chambers was appointed interim CEO and Baker was removed, becoming Executive Chair of the Board of Directors. [...] A Mozilla spokesperson said in a statement: "We are aware of the lawsuit filed against Mozilla. We deny the allegations and intend to vigorously defend against this lawsuit. Mozilla has a 25-plus-year track record of maintaining the highest standards of integrity and compliance with all applicable laws. We look forward to presenting our defense in court and are confident that the facts will demonstrate that we have acted appropriately. As this is an ongoing legal matter, we will not be providing further comments at this time."
Chambers and Chehak are both named in the complaint, along with Mitchell Baker, the former CEO of Mozilla who stepped down in February and announced Chambers as her successor. "Mr Teixeira was enthusiastic to resume his critical role after treatment, but Mozilla would not tolerate an executive with cancer," said Amy Kangas Alexander, an attorney with law firm Stokes Lawrence who is representing the plaintiff, in an email to The Register. "When Mr Teixeira refused to be marginalized because of his disability, Mozilla retaliated and placed him on leave against his will. Mozilla has sidelined Mr Teixeira at the very moment he needs to be preparing his family for the possibility of a future without him."
The complaint claims that Teixeira, appointed in August 2022, helped reverse the decade-long decline of Firefox, which generates about 90 percent of Mozilla's revenue and is the company's only profitable product. He's further credited with growing Mozilla's advertising business, and AI capabilities, and with reducing investment in the money-losing Pocket service. These and other successes, it's alleged, led to conversation in September 2023 when Baker outlined a plan for Teixeira to become CEO. Then he took medical leave and before he could return, the complaint says, Chambers was appointed interim CEO and Baker was removed, becoming Executive Chair of the Board of Directors. [...] A Mozilla spokesperson said in a statement: "We are aware of the lawsuit filed against Mozilla. We deny the allegations and intend to vigorously defend against this lawsuit. Mozilla has a 25-plus-year track record of maintaining the highest standards of integrity and compliance with all applicable laws. We look forward to presenting our defense in court and are confident that the facts will demonstrate that we have acted appropriately. As this is an ongoing legal matter, we will not be providing further comments at this time."
Qualified (Score:1, Troll)
Fights for a place at the trough. Isn't that the primary management qualification?
Re:Qualified (Score:4, Insightful)
Serious illness affects your brain too (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Not only that, but in C-suite you don't get the same protections workers do, because you must be available 24/7 to solve problems, so that everyone in the company doesn't get fucked by major issues you're dealing with. And you get paid big bucks and given golden parachutes to compensate for risks associated with these high level roles.
Having a C-suite guy who is missing from his duties for three months, and will then likely have to have constant absence for severely debilitating treatments is not realistica
Re:Serious illness affects your brain too (Score:5, Interesting)
You and OP are speculating about potential events.
You can't fire someone because you think they might be unavailable or might not be thinking clearly due to a medical diagnosis.
I'm sure it will come out in court if there was a legitimate performance reason and not some made up shit about chemo rain and time he might not be available in the future.
Re:Serious illness affects your brain too (Score:5, Interesting)
For the record, I don't have access to his contract, but I have leafed through the claim, and many things in it stand out as frankly stupid. But that's the nature of making these sorts of claims that are aimed at securing highest possible settlement, you throw all of the shit at the wall in hopes that some of it will stick. Many of which will be internally contradictory, such as point 76 (claimant admits to putting his health data online into a blog) vs point 104 (mozilla humiliates claimant by making claims about his health status... that he published for everyone to see on the internet).
Now for the actual points, C-suite are almost never on a typical employment contract. Because they genuinely have to work insane hours that would be illegal if they were on a contract much of the time in most nations. And because they're not hired for performance at a specific task, but a much more generalist and wide ranging leadership job where exact requirements aren't as easily defined.
So instead they're usually on what's commonly called "executive employment agreement" which establishes a number of what's commonly termed as "considerations", basically outlining metrics, goals and expectations both C-suite officer and the company hiring him have for each other. One of those is usually 24/7 availability upon demand.
This is why these contracts tend to have much higher compensation rates and golden parachutes instead of much lower payment rates of those that actually perform the tasks led by C-suite corporate officers.
That said, Mozilla has always been weird in how it did actual bureaucracy, so this could not be the case here. But in general, this is industry standard. C-suite can be fired at a whim, because even minor failures can catastrophic for the company at that level if not immediately addressed.
Notably, this is in the allegations filed:
>On March 21, 2024, Mr. Teixeira received a negative performance review that attributed alleged performance concerns to Mr. Teixeira’s leave. For example, the performance review stated, “Your organizational design...resulted in a leadership team that could not succeed in your absence, which is fundamentally an organizational weakness and risk to the business.”
In other words, he failed to prepare his area of responsibility for his absence. As he's likely required to by his executive employment agreement. The reason why you get big bucks is because you shoulder a much greater responsibility. And he failed at that. Hence the options described in the claim that he got: to be demoted to a VP, take a leave or begin termination procedures.
My best guess having read the actual claim? He wants a bigger golden parachute and believes that he can negotiate one if files a case like this. Because this is highly unlikely to be decided by court. It will almost certainly be settled.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Serious illness affects your brain too (Score:5, Insightful)
I could believe the availability argument if certain rich people weren't running five corporations simultaneously and also complaining about people working from home.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
You've never been in C-suite circles I take it?
A lot of leadership is know-who. People think lavish C-suite parties are fun and a great place to rest. In reality, they're a nightmarish (for more agreeable people like myself) points of wheeling and dealing, with heavy prep work for everyone one and often an itinerary on who's hand needs to be shaken and at what point and what are the strong and weak points of each person of interest at the party that you need to deal with. You can easily lead a dozen compani
Re:Serious illness affects your brain too (Score:5, Interesting)
One last point I should've made clear in my larger reply above, but I tend to assume people read the sources when I write out on the subject. And after I post, I remember that I'm on the internet, and people don't even read the context of the thread, much less the OP, much less the things linked in it, much original sources for whatever clickbait that is linked in the OP.
He states in his claim that he has stage four cancer in the liver. He's dying.
>On April 6, 2024, Mr. Teixeira disclosed to Ms. Chambers that cancer had been detected in his liver, his condition was considered stage 4, and he would likely need some additional treatment.
This is why I think he filed this for a bigger golden parachute. C-suite people get hired based on past performance and knowing right people. This is why they don't fight over employment rights in court. It's a career ending move that will have zero sympathy from fellow C-suite people and mark you as untrustworthy. Because this is the world of cut throat top level leadership, not typical employment.
But if you have stage four cancer in the liver, your career is already over, and all you have left is maximum milking of your last place of employment for as much money as you can get out of them. If I were him, I would've probably done the same thing.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Everyone above fry cook gets hired based on their resume and references. So?
As far as not suing, I've been in the same situation. An executive who sues has ended their career unless it was something super blatant, on film, open n shut.
He has stage 4. Ok. And? Was he unable to perform his role? They obviously have no problem with short term CEOs. If he was not able to perform and that can be demonstrated then he loses.
I don't know the laws in his state but in plenty of other states you can't fire some
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
C-suite doesn't get hired based on resume and references. He gets hired based on who he personally knows first, who can vouch for him second, and if he and the company can agree to terms first.
Spotless resume is for workers, not C-suite people. C-suite people are in fact expected to have failures from which they learned to show that they actually understand leadership and have failed in the past, so they don't fail at your company. And they'll probably not be on the written resume, but known in the grapevin
Re: (Score:2)
Resume and reference is exactly the same as who you know and what you've done. Literally, the same thing.
Is HR a trained medical professional capable of deterring his health status, ability to work, the impact his treatment will have on his ability to work?
No. That's why they're going to get crushed in court. There is no evidence we have seen that says he is unable to perform his duties nor does the law have any exception in any state I'm aware of for stage 4 cancer. They fucked up, they're going to pay
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that you think a judge will be ruling on this beyond signing off on the settlement is cherry on the cake. If this actually went through courts, this guy would be dead for several years when it would finish.
Re: (Score:2)
You are correct, with the little detail that he probably is more interested in providing for his decedents. His lifespan is probably measured in months. He has some to care for.
Re: (Score:2)
I figured that was a given since I did note that he's dying with stage 4 cancer in the liver. Can't take money with you into the afterlife even if you believe in that.
Case did the usual pity party with that, by stating that he has a (obviously very high class and high maintenance) housewife and a "disabled daughter" which can mean anything from extremely autistic to "has an unfortunate drug habit like a lot of kids of rich absent fathers".
Re: (Score:3)
It's not really even a question of mental acuity. There's so much administrative bullshit required in the management (ahem) of serious disease in America that getting cancer is like getting a couple more full-time jobs.
That said, firing somebody because they get cancer is The Textbook Example of Assholery, and it happens all the time. And I personally don't believe that his illness was causing problems, because I personally don't believe that C-Suite executives contribute anything worthwhile to any compan
Re: Serious illness affects your brain too (Score:2)
It *could* and *might*, thatâ(TM)s not the same as it *definitely does* which is exactly what disability discrimination law addresses. You canâ(TM)t discriminate against people just because they have a disability, you have to demonstrate that theyâ(TM)re not capable of doing the job, and that thatâ(TM)s true even if you make reasonable accommodations for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? So after I was treated for cancer 23 years ago, I was no longer capable of coding better than anything you've ever written (assuming you code)?
FOAD/
Tech bro culture (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Blatant misogyny rightfully tends to get you viewed as a troll. You obviously already knew that but did it anyway,
Re: (Score:2)
Your blinkered, biased and narrow view may be your truth, but it is not the truth.
You've never looked, and never attempted to look. I'm sure if someone gave a list you'd tirelessly nitpick every last example about why the company is bad without knowing much about them at all.
Re:Tech bro culture (Score:5, Insightful)
In my entire career I've never seen a woman leader who was anything but bad. They cosplay at what they think good leadership is at best and most don't even pretend to try.
Two ways to look at this. Either every woman leader is bad or the problem is with you.
Re:Tech bro culture (Score:4, Insightful)
Still waiting for an example or even personal anecdote of -anyone- who had a good female boss. Just one.
OK, I'll bite the obvious troll from the raging misogynerd.
Me. I did.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why would they need an excuse to fire him? (Score:3, Insightful)
The man is Chief Product Officer at Mozilla. And one of Mozilla's products is Firefox. I would think that's ground enough for dismissal.
Re: (Score:3)
Too bad for Mozilla they didn't fire him for ruining Firefox, then. Not that they would, because what he's been doing is clearly what they want done.
The complaint says they fired him due to concerns around his having cancer, which is clearly illegal if true. If there is anything like evidence they are getting reamed. Couldn't happen to a more worthless bunch of dildos.
Execs (Score:3)
Re: Execs (Score:5, Informative)
Following Gates Protocol (Score:5, Insightful)
Needles to say, when you're around vultures that's what you might expect to happen.
The hard contradiction here is Mozilla selling an image of fairness, inclusion, friendly, and the first thing these vultures do is to try to feed from a sick person.
From Mozilla's own homepage:
We’re not a normal tech company. The things we create prioritize people and their privacy over profits.
After this situation, I think they are a pretty rather normal tech company and their main priority is profits over anything else.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: CPO? (Score:2)
You may wanna brush up on your star wars, c3po was obviously a joke.
Competiton (Score:2)
Was it him? (Score:3)
As Chief Product Officer, Steve is responsible for leading our product teams — setting a product vision and strategy that accelerates the growth and impact of Mozilla’s existing products.
Is this the clown that keeps focusing expansion and eternal code churn instead simply making a good browser? If so then you should have given him the boot years ago!