(I understand, percentage wise, due to bias or whatever, it's likely a higher percent of things would be overturned for women, but it's not like the error rate for non-women was 0 anyway, so why not just make a process that nobody is going to complain about?)
Instead, the thing that seems "okay" on that point would be "let the men appeal too" (IE my parent is wrong no matter what!)
Management is not a monolith.
And if your a big company and take the piss in court you get the book thrown at you by the Triibuneral see Imarsat a few years ago.
(Let's ignore the obvious point - not everyone is malicious, some companies really do want to try to make sure people get correct ratings and get rid of discrimination, and aren't worried about the cost of lawsuits. These companies exist, i've worked at them)
Again, i think you missed the point (I guess i'll be more explicit when it's a touchy subject like this). If you read the allegation, women were allowed to appeal, men were not.
Someone tried to say that this was okay, because gender bias affects women more.
But it's not okay. It makes no sense. Either you believe some people are getting terminated wrongly, in which case both women and men should be able to appeal, or you don't, in which case nobody should get to appeal :)