this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2025
1880 points (96.4% liked)
Microblog Memes
6470 readers
2221 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It isn't, but it sure is an improvement
How isn't it? The company I'm working for is touting it as them being so progressive. Meanwhile, they're only making changes that make them more money. None of the changes they're making is adding any risk.
That's what I mean - only doing DEI things only when there is a profit motive isn't ideal, but it's better than not doing DEI at all.
In an ideal world, doing the right thing would either always be the profitable thing to do (either because customers are smart, or because laws punish you if you don't), or companies would do the right thing regardless of profit simply because it's the right thing, but clearly we don't live in an ideal world.
I never implied that DEI was worse than no DEI. In fact I said I mostly liked it. Also only doing DEI when there is profit is the definition of DEI to companies. Companies are not doing DEI because it's the right thing to do. They're doing it because it makes them the money that they've left on the table by being racist, sexist, or whatever.
I've talked to the DEI consultant. "If being equitable loses money, then don't do it."