Ex-staffers slam Microsoft's 'lackluster' response to stacks of internal complaints More than 230 internal complaints of harassment and discrimination within Microsoft were handled in a “lackluster” way by the business, according to documents made public yesterday in a class action lawsuit. The case was first filed in 2015 and the lead plaintiffs, Katherine Moussouris and Holly Muenchow, are seeking approval …
They have accused Microsoft of running a “common, discriminatory pay and promotions process” that is “unreliable” and “based on invalid criteria”...
...the plaintiffs claimed Microsoft’s investigations team is “notorious… for ‘rubber-stamping’ management”, while employees have “little faith” in investigations.
Sadly, this isn't specific to Microsoft. This behavior is commonplace today in tech companies worldwide.
"This behavior is commonplace today in tech companies worldwide."
Actual discrimination based on sex: I have my doubts (consider the 'Google memo' from a while back - if there is ANY discrimination it is REVERSE discrimination against white heterosexual christian men, who typically don't whine because it's not "manly" to do so)
Being sued by women who should NOT be promoted or given raises, because they were NOT promoted nor given raises: I suspect that THIS may be more common than not.
The problem is that the court system and the legislation *ENABLES* "gold digger" types to FRIVOLOUSLY sue their employers.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't want to see ACTUAL CASES of discrimination punished as hard as possible. It's just that I doubt it's REALLY happening to THAT extent.
I call B.S. on their lawsuit.
I call B.S. on their lawsuit
We do so enjoy your insightful commentary which you, doubless, make based on full knowledge of the specifics of the case and the working environment involved.
Who am I kidding? You have pavlovian kneejerk against anything that seems to involve equality for people you despise[1]. You couldn't be any more of a caricature if you added 'yee-haw' to every post.
[1] Anyone to the left of David Drake by the look of it.
While it would be desirable for a 0.00% complaint rate, there will always be people unhappy with something or someone. So is a 0.03% (3 complaints per 10,000 employees) complaint rate per year good or bad? I don't know what the complaint rate with a near perfect organization is but it will be non 0 because many people are always unhappy and bitter about something.
For a mega company that has more people wanting to work for it than there are jobs. Some parts of the organisation seem to think that if you can't take it, then walk as there are plenty more wanting your job.
No one should suffer sexual harrasment no matter how big or small the company is but it does seem that the bigger they are, the more ********** ********* they employ.
@Steve Davies 3
Another factor:
The more successful the company the more those who do this sort of thing consider themselves to be untouchable because of their talent.
MS will be stuffed to the gills with god complex, think they're a genius types.
They will be used to doing as they please.
"they can't fire me, I *AM* [critical project name or dept name]"
This post has been deleted by its author
I live in Redmond, I'm in the industry (clearly, enjoying TheReg forums), and do not work for Microsoft... I'm surrounded by them.
Make no mistake, the God Complex and "I am the center of $projectFoo, I am Super Cool™" is rampant. I've had to percussively remind one or two that they're really not.
I'm a UNIX engineer, old Net, from Silicon Valley, and I can tell you that it is just as bad there at Yahoo!, Google, and Facebook... While they're wallowing in their KumBaYah bullshit pretending to be enlightened, assholes are assholes, and corporate is corporate: We see again and again that the toe that gravitate to corporate are sexist (etc etc) jerks AND Corporate HR is there to appear to be useful. There Is A Process! they claim, because:
It's all facade, and it's all about appearances.
"the God Complex and 'I am the center of $projectFoo, I am Super Cool™' is rampant"
This became apparent OUTSIDE of Redmond with the release of Win-10-nic, following "Ape". I mean, what ELSE could possibly explain it?
Consider the engineer responsible for 'The Metro' and 'The Ribbon' and all *KINDS* of horrible ideas, who happens to be a woman. They kept her employed there until late last year, even promoted her, but fired Sinofsky over "Ape" (i.e. the tiles in Windows 8). Go fig.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larson-Green
If there was TRULY equal treatment, she should've been canned along with Sinofsky. Hell, fire the entire management team for coming up with Win-10-nic in the FIRST place. "In their own bubble-world", as I expected. NO clue as to what the customers want (that would be a Windows 7.1 that has minor improvements and solid design with no security problems or massive UI re-invention).
In all the years I've met and worked with various Microsoft staff in the UK I don't think any of them (outside of receptionists) have been female.
I'm usually the first to sigh and say "oh women's rights/pay gap/equal pay" but come to think of it compared to most other companies it's rather odd.
I actually thought that the female representation in tech roles was fairly good, and I saw no evidence of discrimination within my area - good people generally got promoted regardless of gender/race or anything else.
Now the complaints procedure on the other hand was a farce. I saw several occurrences of highly inappropriate (in a business sense) behaviour get swept under the carpet with no consequences or explanation. In both cases the perpetrators are still there (or were when I left) and have been promoted at least once. It wouldn't surprise me if the discrimination procedure was similarly toothless.
There were definitely large pockets of testosterone around (I guess every company has them) so I wouldn't doubt that many, if not all, of the complaints are valid
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
