Reverse discrimination

Homepage Forums Current Events Board Reverse discrimination

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #9863
      Mick1Mick1
      Participant

      I don’t think reverse discrimination will ever become a thing. In this case, a former Starbucks employee is suing Starbucks for reverse discrimination. He is a caucasian, heterosexual man:

      Fired Starbucks manager claims he faced ‘egregious’ discrimination for being heterosexual | The Independent

      I used to run marketing and business development for a large law firm (four of them, actually). One of my peers was very successful, and yet, was let go from a large Midwestern law firm. He can’t find a job, and one employer explained to him that he “didn’t fit their culture.” What she meant was that they were essentially prohibited from hiring a white, hetero male.

      Too bad. It’s a different world.

      • This topic was modified 7 months, 1 week ago by Mick1Mick1.

      Audaces fortuna iuvat

    • #9864
      johnnyo53johnnyo53
      Participant

      Just another illustration of the hypocrisy of demtards and libtards.

      “I remember that one fateful day when Coach took me aside. I knew what was coming. "You don't have to tell me," I said. "I'm off the team, aren't I?" "Well," said Coach, "you never were really ON the team. You made that uniform you're wearing out of rags and towels, and your helmet is a toy space helmet. You show up at practice and then either steal the ball and make us chase you to get it back, or you try to tackle people at inappropriate times." It was all true what he was saying. And yet, I

    • #9868
      Mick1Mick1
      Participant

      I used to run marketing and business development for a large law firm (four of them, actually). One of my peers was very successful, and yet, was let go from a large Midwestern law firm. He can’t find a job, and one employer explained to him that he “didn’t fit their culture.” What she meant was that they were essentially prohibited from hiring a white, hetero male. Too bad. It’s a different world.

      Apparently, President Trump is not a fan, at least of the large law firms that gave him grief. He’s revoked the security clearances of both Covington & Burling (#29 on the AmLaw Top 100 Law firms list) and Perkins Coie (#45).

      Interesting for two reasons. First, the Top 30 firms are pouring everything they can into artificial intelligence and establishing a partner:associate ratio to reflect a Big Four accounting firm profile. Most law firms have a roughly equal partner: associate ratios, the large firms are lopsided, with the same “up or out” mentality that drives the Big Four. This could significantly impact Covington, given their reliance upon government-related work. Both attorneys and clients could flee.

      Ditto for PC, currently a sliver from falling into the second half of the AmLaw 100. That’s a no-man’s land…they aren’t as cheap as very strong mid-sized and regional firms, and they don’t have the bench strength of firms in the Top 30. A similar phenomenon happened in my first business, accounting. Between 1972 and 1988, 42 of the top 50 firms went out of business, for similar reasons.

      Audaces fortuna iuvat

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.