

Roy Wildstein - usea
http://scripting.com/2014/03/17/royWildstein.html

======
gavanwoolery
More people seem to care about one sentence in the article than the rest of
it.

In fact, many people are missing this sentence:

"I don't know if there's any solution to this. I certainly don't advocate not
hiring people Roy's age -- I'm now older than he was then."

...and thus taking the following sentence out of context:

"But every time a company hires someone who is not a young male, they run the
risk that the new hire isn't there to work, rather is there to scam you."

Edit: that said, the author really needs to rephrase his words or he is going
to piss more people off.

~~~
jessedhillon
I've also noticed that a lot of people complain when the statement immediately
following "I'm not racist but..." is given more emphasis than the preceding
disclaimer. /s

~~~
scrabble
Part of the reason for this is that when people hear the word "but" they
mentally remove all the words in the sentence preceding it. One way to get
around this is by replacing "but" with "and." That's my opinion, but I'm not
an expert.

~~~
waps
The real problem here is that legal protections for certain classes by
themselves create a disincentive for hiring those people.
Discrimination/racism protections especially suffer from this.

I've had some experience with this as well. In Europe (Brussels) it's plain to
see that most companies don't hire certain "bad" minorities, then fix their
legally mandated "racism stats" (ie. a quota) by demanding the cleaning
company provide them with contractor cleaners of the correct ethnicity.

Why ? Because if they sue, the damage is 24x their monthly pay, which is next
to nothing.

This is a horribly bad factor for people like Jewish programmers, black
sysadmins, and the like. They're doubly fucked : there's a very good legal
reason for companies not to hire them, and they have a good legal incentive to
be incompetent assholes, so they get fired and get legal damages from their
legal anti-discrimination rights. In addition, the government's education
incentives cause and strengthen the racist prejudices. Black
sysadmins/programmers are worse than white sysadmins ... well of course ! If
the law mandates a passing grade for black sysadmins in university is 40%
where whites have to score 60%, this would be exactly the expected result
wouldn't it ?

In the end there is no substitute to waiting for immigrants to naturally work
their way up the food chain like has mostly happened in America. Problem is
simple : this takes multiple generations.

This is one of the many reasons it's really bad to protect certain classes of
people, doubly so when we're talking ethnicities or religious groups (as
opposed to say, stem graduates, legal professionals, ...). Plus it generally
seems to me to fly in the face of the idea of non-discrimination. You cannot
achieve a colorblind society with racist law, in fact you're achieving the
opposite.

Of course the problem is that discrimination laws are not trying to achieve a
colorblind society. Rather they're trying to throw a religious/ethnic group a
bone to prevent them from rioting, and making their situation worse in the
process.

Let's face it, in Western Europe if you're muslim/jewish/black/... (and not
self-employed) you want to be an incompetent asshole, because that's what the
law rewards. You can effectively get 2 or 3 wages paid out if you do that.
Nothing to do with ethnicity or religion, has a LOT to do with people
attempting to take shortcuts in fixing observed injustices.

There are some that are creating their own companies and avoiding the problem
this way. But this is much, much harder than making it as an employee. I have
a lot of respect for the few that do this, though.

------
blatherard
This isn't much different from someone getting mugged by someone from a
different class or race and then concluding that "those people" can't be
trusted. Sad.

~~~
protomyth
Actually, it is different. The "normal" mugger gets caught and goes to jail,
this one has a loophole that allows hum to walk off with your wallet without
being arrested.

It's a basic scam created by a law. You see it with some injury cases[1] and
many of the lawyers suing businesses based on the ADA. The law is meant to
protect people from an injustice done, but can be used in the opposite manner.

Chilling affects like these are often mitigated by documentation by HR.
Specifically, performance reviews and performance improvement plans. He was
not equipped to provide the documentation.

This is just a reality and cold logic. You can say he is "Sad", but he is
expressing the "stick hand in fire" learning of the situation. The sadness
should be expressed to the folks who fit into the spirit of the law that has
been abused.

1) often with headlines "X who collects disability enters a triathlon" or
similar sensationalist stuff.

~~~
blatherard
There's plenty of ways for people to take advantage of their employers and the
law does effectively nothing for the aggrieved.

One case I directly encountered was a young, white male who was responsible
for procurement for a small company I was working for. It turned out he was
ordering all kinds of stuff for himself (the one thing I remember is he bought
a game console with it). He was fired and the police were called. Their
response was basically, since he had permission to order stuff, they weren't
going to pursue it.

The law failed here, too! But let me tell you what didn't happen: nobody
decided to use that as a reason to not hire young, white males. What did
happen, correctly, was some additional controls were put in to prevent abuse.

~~~
protomyth
You react to what your burned with. Most places put in the control measures I
mentioned. Some go the way of the poster particularly if they cannot afford an
HR solution. The stats on disabled employment since the passage of the ADA are
problematic.

Who did the company next hire for procurement?

------
aaronpk
The particular sentence that most people are reacting to is this:

"But every time a company hires someone who is not a young male, they run the
risk that the new hire isn't there to work, rather is there to scam you."
[http://scripting.com/2014/03/17/royWildstein.html#aIDKIT](http://scripting.com/2014/03/17/royWildstein.html#aIDKIT)

~~~
spindritf
And those reactions... I don't even see anyone telling him he's not correct,
just that it will/could/should be used against him legally.

 _the best part about this article is how it will be used against him in
court_
[http://scripting.com/2014/03/17/royWildstein.html](http://scripting.com/2014/03/17/royWildstein.html)

[https://twitter.com/codeslinger/status/445665523632984064](https://twitter.com/codeslinger/status/445665523632984064)

 _And if anyone needed any evidence to back up a discrimination lawsuit
against @davewiner, they certainly have it now._
[http://scripting.com/2014/03/17/royWildstein.html](http://scripting.com/2014/03/17/royWildstein.html)

[https://twitter.com/Mickipedia/status/445665545514668032](https://twitter.com/Mickipedia/status/445665545514668032)

 _No, don’t worry everything is fine with startup culture_
[http://scripting.com/2014/03/17/royWildstein.html](http://scripting.com/2014/03/17/royWildstein.html)
_(side note, pretty sure roy might want to sue over this too)_

[https://twitter.com/whatidoissecret/status/44566292849965056...](https://twitter.com/whatidoissecret/status/445662928499650560)

~~~
polemic
> _" I don't even see anyone telling him he's not correct..."_

If you've only got 140 characters, do you really need to spend any saying that
he's wrong, because I certainly don't need that spelled out for me.

------
kennywinker
I'd just like to point out the last time Dave Winer weighed in on a similar
topic:
[http://scripting.com/2013/08/19/whyArentThereMoreWomenProgra...](http://scripting.com/2013/08/19/whyArentThereMoreWomenProgrammers)

> Programming is a very modal activity. To be any good at it you have to
> focus. And be very patient. I imagine it's a lot like sitting in a blind
> waiting for a rabbit to show up so you can grab it and bring it home for
> dinner.

> There is specialization in our species. It seems pretty clear that
> programming as it exists today is a mostly male thing. Which also raises the
> obvious question that perhaps we can make it so that it can better-use the
> abilities of the other half of our species?

~~~
gavanwoolery
This is probably pretty easy to label as sexism - not to jump to the author's
defense again (I don't know him at all). I wouldn't say women can't program
(they can, obviously) or do anything else males can, but there is definitely a
different set of interests between males and females (generally speaking). I
don't think its because of market manipulation or brainwashing, I just think
the two sexes are wired differently (psychologically and physically). So, I
don't know if his point is valid, but I do know that males and females have
different traits (we don't need to be equal to be treated as equals, I guess).

------
polemic
> _" But every time a company hires someone who is not a young male, they run
> the risk that the new hire isn't there to work, rather is there to scam
> you."_

Old white male, having accrued all the benefits of the privilege of his
position, proceeds to use his power to make sure that only People Like Him can
continue to succeed.

Rather than fix problems, he'd rather tell you all that Everything is OK,
being Agist and Sexist isn't _our_ problem, it's _their_ problem.

~~~
gatehouse
Yeah, the day you have a dollar is the day someone shows up with their hand
out. From what I've seen of the legal system it is just a proxy for brute
force, the only thing it really accomplishes is to keep everyone from killing
each other, beyond that it is pretty much the law of the jungle.

I think software development actually has an easier time than most professions
to weed out freeloaders. You can make someone program right in the interview.
Programming ability is an extremely perishable skill.

EDIT: also, obviously, REAL reference checking.

------
cdent
Setting aside the larger issues I find it's curious that Dave doesn't even
take a moment to consider that perhaps "Roy" just didn't like working in the
style that Dave demanded. Some people do need to think a lot before pooping
out the golden gem or perhaps just need some reflection before they can move
on. Some people are hard to collaborate with, maybe Dave was, for Roy?

Dave's position seems to have been "there's one way to work, you can't do it
with me on these big things so let's try the same method on these smaller
things. Oh that doesn't work either, let's try the same method with a
different person."

Never any critique of the methods used by the authority structures.

I reckon this does, in fact, have great bearing on the larger issue.

~~~
kennywinker
Not liking the working style, or being unproductive because of it, isn't a
reason to sue on being let go.

Not saying we're hearing the whole story and this "Roy" guy is totally
wrong... it could easily be that Dave WAS discriminating against "Roy" because
of his age. Or the firing was done in such a way that it seemed that way to
"Roy".

------
tptacek
Why can't I have 3 flag buttons? Even if they all registered the same single
flag signal, it would be gratifying to be able to mash them all in this case.
This is less a blog post than an elaborate, carefully timed troll.

~~~
yummyfajitas
Do you believe the facts claimed are incorrect? Or that the analysis of the
incentives is flawed? What's your specific objection?

I'd normally ignore comments like this. But coming from you I feel like there
might be some substance to the criticism that I simply don't recognize. Can
you explain?

~~~
tptacek
Happily, this story appears to have been buried shortly after I wrote that
comment, sparing us both any incentive to hash out the merits of Winer's post.

------
Chromozon
Ignoring the ageism here, can we discuss why this would not be an open-closed
case and cost thousands of dollars just to lose?

~~~
greenyoda
That had me puzzled too. If the CEO would have documented every interaction
with the employee in writing (e.g., "on 3/17/85 I gave him job #1, explained
what I wanted done, and he failed to do this, and said..."), he would have had
a pretty solid case for having fired him for incompetence. It's what any
competent HR person or employment lawyer would have advised him to do,
especially since the employee was a member of a protected class.

What really surprised me is that the same guy could have later been hired at
Apple.

This whole story is a bit scary, since I'm over 40 (the age at which U.S. age
discrimination laws kick in) and I wouldn't want bad experiences like this to
deter an employer from hiring me.

~~~
danielweber
It was too much work to write all that stuff up.

But Dave could have just given him severance instead. "Here's a week's pay, go
away." It seemed that Roy was there for several weeks, so one more week to
make Roy go away forever is money well spent.

------
gavanwoolery
I would rewrite this blog post and use "Roy's" real name...he deserves to be
shamed.

Edit: I don't mind the downvotes, but as usual I appreciate any reasoning
behind them...I don't think what I said was irrelevant? This guy is apparently
dangerous and his real name should be exposed.

~~~
jotux
>he deserves to be shamed.

You heard one side of a story about a contentious situation between two people
and you want to publicly shame someone based on this? What if the older guy
has a completely different story that explains why he had trouble working
there? Just don't dox people -- and if you really think it's necessary to try
to publicly shame someone make sure you have truly irrefutable evidence to
back you up.

~~~
gavanwoolery
Also a good point - thanks I did not really think of that -- just a gut
reaction to lawsuits. That said, if this guy really did what he did, I hope
that real justice eventually prevails.

------
harrystone
People that are looking to scam you are a class by themselves, and they can
belong to any other class.

~~~
kennywinker
Honestly, this! I feel like almost every person in the world, white males
included, could come up with a reason for a bogus wrongful dismissal suit if
they so desired.

------
gojomo
If you make it harder and more costly (on average) to fire people, companies
will be more reluctant to hire.

This goes for employees in general, and subgroups ("protected classes") that
public policy may be trying to help.

Housing anti-discrimination law can backfire in a similar way.

~~~
rabino
Not really. Companies need to hire to make money, and that's a hell of a good
motivator to hire anyway.

~~~
gojomo
More precisely, they want to make profits.

Increasing the cost of new employees – compared to, say, overtime,
outsourcing, automation, or other kinds of employees – decreases the hiring of
the more-costly employees.

------
benched
I haven't actually done this, not to this extent. Still, I absolutely see
myself morphing more in Roy's general direction as I get older. I see it a
little like extracting karma from the world on my own terms. That is, in my
youth, some companies got a slice of my brilliance at a deep discount, because
of my young age. Now, having lost much of the naivety of youth, _particularly_
with regard to what companies and executives want to tell me the "deal" is, I
take advantage any way I can, at every turn.

It goes without saying that you shouldn't hire me, but you won't know any
better.

~~~
sp332
It's too bad companies and employees don't have loyalty to each other anymore.
You could have been respected for having paid your dues.

~~~
benched
I agree it's too bad. I also think the problem is many orders of magnitude
larger than I am. That is, the ol' "being the change I want to see in the
world" will most likely end with me getting shafted.

Until the day pigs fly, and managers and executives stop lying, milking
plausible deniability for all it's worth, wasting everyone's time with re-orgs
and resets, surprise-laying people off two days after telling them they're
doing great, generally playing shady politics, etc, etc...

