Thread regarding Nike Inc. layoffs

JDs role at Stanford is a good reminder of why you need DEI policies and what is the real alternative without them

Just board and executive office’s friends getting roles over more qualified but less connected people.

by
| 1261 views | | 7 replies (last August 18) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1k2nab5nj

7 replies (most recent on top)

DEI’s poor placement of people may be one of the most damaging issues for Nike. At its core, a company is simply a hierarchy of individuals. When the wrong people are placed in roles, the whole system becomes dysfunctional.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @va+1k2nab5nj

@f0+1k2nab5nj Well said. Not just racism but s-xism too.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @j1+1k2nab5nj

What are you moaning about? You won't get anywhere close to Stanford.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @f2+1k2nab5nj

DEI suffers the same woes as communism. It talks a good game but humans ruin the implementation.

Trying to fix upstream issues like education inequality or racial bias in young childhood career interests are commendable ideals.

Fixing perceived racism by implementing HR mandated racism is vile and the cause of many of our company’s current problems.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @f0+1k2nab5nj

@an if by talent you mean people that were able to go to good schools because their parents or grandparents were not red-taped into bad education. Then yes, DEI is the same thing as people from privileged families hiring their friends. But that is not what talent.

DEI was never about hiring unqualified people, it was just about making sure the pool goes beyond your neighbourhood friends.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @d9+1k2nab5nj

DEI is the key to Nikes recovery!!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b6+1k2nab5nj

DEI policies are exactly the same thing as JD’s backdoor play. The only difference is who gets discriminated against. Competitive companies hire talent. Title 9 projects against discrimination, it’s not a preferential hiring guidebook.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @an+1k2nab5nj

Post a reply

: