Ka-pi96 said:
Teeqoz said:
Ka-pi96 said:
Well there's the whole innocent until proven guilty thing and so far I haven't seen a single shred of evidence that Microsoft base their promotions or pay structures on gender. So until that changes I'll just assume this is one of those cases where someone is just trying to make easy cash from some frivolous lawsuit which happens far too often these days.
|
Actually it's "Innocent til proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". Big difference. BTW if you want a illustration of my second paragraph, just take a look at this thread, it's like you people don't even acknowledge that there's even the slightest possibilty of this lawsuit actually being based on reality.
BTW Kapi, I could make a company where I only ever hired men, regardless of how good the women applicants to the job was, and using your logic, that would be completely okay, because after all, how would you prove that it was the gender that made me hire the men instead of the women? It's like you think discrimination in the western world doesn't exist at all just because the situation is vastly better than before.
|
That doesn't change the fact that as of yet no evidence has actually been shown...
And no, by my logic that wouldn't be ok. It would of course be wrong to discriminate like that, but it would also be wrong for someone to sue you for it without proof that you are actually discriminating.
Maybe she does have some good evidence to actually back up her claims but until that evidence is made public the safest assumption is that this is just another pathetic cash grab law suit.
|
The "safest assumption" when you have no proof or evidence from either sides is to not make any assumption at all.
