Tweet
A disgruntled former employee is claiming that our organization practices discrimination on the basis of age, sex, and religion. Additionally, he claims that sexual harassment is rampant.
Well, let’s see, the youngest employee is in their 20s, the oldest is in their 60s. The executive director is a woman and of the three deputy executive directors, there is two men and one woman, so pretty balanced at the top. The rest of the organization is roughly 50/50, with a few teams being more men, some teams being more women, but if you go by pay grade, it is a pretty even distribution. Religion is an interesting claim, there are, to my knowledge, two atheists, a Muslim, two Mormons, and a whole lot of people who have never brought up their religion. The only reason I know about the people that I do is because, I’m one of the atheists, the other one I’m not entirely certain is an atheist, but I know he doesn’t actively practice any religion (he made the comment that he was willing to cover any religious holiday that anyone else wanted to take off because he didn’t practice any of them), the Muslim I know about because someone from outside the organization tried to use that fact to discredit him (as if that is something that discredits someone), and the two Mormons I know about because they graduated from BYU Hawaii, and while it is possible to get in without being a Mormon, it is incredibly rare to happen.
For an organization that discriminates on age, sex, and religion, we sure do seem to have a pretty representative balance of employees.
I can’t comment on the sexual harassment, other than I’ve never seen it. I’ll grant, he was based in a different office than me, so there could be stuff happening there that I’m not aware of, but we have such close ties with that office, that you’d think we would have heard of it if nothing else.
Oh, and he also accused leadership of pressuring staff to approve a contract… which is funny, because I was on the review team for that contract, and I was never pressured to approve it. Leadership was completely on board with our initial recommendation to deny the contract on initial submission and I was genuinely impressed by the improvements on the resubmission and was in favor of approving it on resubmission (though, I was in favor of there being more conditions added to the approval than ultimately were added, but that is splitting hairs).
Yeah, someone is looking to try to get a quick payout on a lawsuit that he hopes we’ll just settle on to avoid a court battle.
Oh, he hasn't actually filed this lawsuit yet, he's only threatening it... but yeah, it is pretty obvious what his goal is.
Well, let’s see, the youngest employee is in their 20s, the oldest is in their 60s. The executive director is a woman and of the three deputy executive directors, there is two men and one woman, so pretty balanced at the top. The rest of the organization is roughly 50/50, with a few teams being more men, some teams being more women, but if you go by pay grade, it is a pretty even distribution. Religion is an interesting claim, there are, to my knowledge, two atheists, a Muslim, two Mormons, and a whole lot of people who have never brought up their religion. The only reason I know about the people that I do is because, I’m one of the atheists, the other one I’m not entirely certain is an atheist, but I know he doesn’t actively practice any religion (he made the comment that he was willing to cover any religious holiday that anyone else wanted to take off because he didn’t practice any of them), the Muslim I know about because someone from outside the organization tried to use that fact to discredit him (as if that is something that discredits someone), and the two Mormons I know about because they graduated from BYU Hawaii, and while it is possible to get in without being a Mormon, it is incredibly rare to happen.
For an organization that discriminates on age, sex, and religion, we sure do seem to have a pretty representative balance of employees.
I can’t comment on the sexual harassment, other than I’ve never seen it. I’ll grant, he was based in a different office than me, so there could be stuff happening there that I’m not aware of, but we have such close ties with that office, that you’d think we would have heard of it if nothing else.
Oh, and he also accused leadership of pressuring staff to approve a contract… which is funny, because I was on the review team for that contract, and I was never pressured to approve it. Leadership was completely on board with our initial recommendation to deny the contract on initial submission and I was genuinely impressed by the improvements on the resubmission and was in favor of approving it on resubmission (though, I was in favor of there being more conditions added to the approval than ultimately were added, but that is splitting hairs).
Yeah, someone is looking to try to get a quick payout on a lawsuit that he hopes we’ll just settle on to avoid a court battle.
Oh, he hasn't actually filed this lawsuit yet, he's only threatening it... but yeah, it is pretty obvious what his goal is.
Comment