If that theory holds, then Meta’s blocklist will hold every worker ever fired by Meta during a salary-reduction layoff, to ensure that the pay reduction affects rehiring.
Which would set up Meta to be vulnerable to an age discrimination lawsuit, since layoffs of people with “excellent performance” records would likely be constructed from salary pay tiers, and thus disproportionately affect people who are with Meta longer, and thus are older.
The discovery questions are twofold, and could be presented to a judge by Meta in order to evaluate the merits of either continuing or cancelling a discrimination lawsuit — negating any objections Meta might file about revealing sensitive workplace data.
1. What is the age distribution of the Meta block list, in percentages only, with a bucket size of 5 years started at age <17, then 18-22, 23-27, etc?
2. What quantity of workers were added to the Meta block list in the six months preceding and following each of Meta’s last few layoffs, truncated to the first significant digit? i.e. 14999 is reported as 10000-19999, 622 is reported as 600-699, etc.
Were I pursuing such a thing, which I am not, those are the class-action discovery questions that I feel would rapidly expose whether a lawsuit could proceed or not. (I am not your lawyer, this is not legal advice, etc.)
That is the other side of the double edged sword used to push DEI.
If statistically, white dudes are getting laid off more than any other group, isn’t it fair to call that racial/sex discrimination regardless of other criteria?
Just like a lack of say women (or women’s pay being different) was being used as evidence of discrimination regardless of criteria?
Could perhaps someone, preferrably from an HR space, confirm or deny this presumption of mine?
> Meta's block lists aren't foolproof. In an incident that resulted in a lawsuit filed last year, Meta accidentally rehired a former employee as a contractor despite him being on a "Do Not Hire" list after he was accused of stalking and harassing a coworker for over a year.
Surely that has to have something to do with why it's so hard to get off the list.
> Despite their experience, the senior engineer told BI that they would still return to Meta if given the chance.
> "It's the worst company I've ever worked for," they said. "But they also pay the best. If I could get in there for a couple more years and make bank, I would do it."
I don't want to be too mean to people I don't know, but it seems pretty plausible that someone who would say this to a reporter could be misunderstanding whether they left on good terms.
Plus, if a principled and ethical engineer leaves the company, I assure you there is a large backlog of very eager replacements. Personally, Id rather see effective dissent from within the org.
There's really no such thing, simply because of that large backlog of eager replacements
From the company's perspective they will happily fire you if you dissent and replace you if they have to
That's how you keep the stock price up I guess.