It looks like to me that they are looking for people with common sense that don't get offended by everything and don't make everything a political issue. I hope we get more companies to do that.
This isn't "somebody said Latina and not Latinx." This is "the CEO wants to be free to use a word that has been notoriously offensive for decades at work."
In my mother tongue there are no "words-than-must-not-be-named" and I struggle to understand the logic behind it. It reminds me of that Paul Grahams text "What you can't say" http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html:
"I can think of one more way to figure out what we can't say: to look at how taboos are created. How do moral fashions arise, and why are they adopted? If we can understand this mechanism, we may be able to see it at work in our own time.
Moral fashions don't seem to be created the way ordinary fashions are. Ordinary fashions seem to arise by accident when everyone imitates the whim of some influential person. The fashion for broad-toed shoes in late fifteenth century Europe began because Charles VIII of France had six toes on one foot. The fashion for the name Gary began when the actor Frank Cooper adopted the name of a tough mill town in Indiana. Moral fashions more often seem to be created deliberately. When there's something we can't say, it's often because some group doesn't want us to.
The prohibition will be strongest when the group is nervous. The irony of Galileo's situation was that he got in trouble for repeating Copernicus's ideas. Copernicus himself didn't. In fact, Copernicus was a canon of a cathedral, and dedicated his book to the pope. But by Galileo's time the church was in the throes of the Counter-Reformation and was much more worried about unorthodox ideas.
To launch a taboo, a group has to be poised halfway between weakness and power. A confident group doesn't need taboos to protect it. It's not considered improper to make disparaging remarks about Americans, or the English. And yet a group has to be powerful enough to enforce a taboo. Coprophiles, as of this writing, don't seem to be numerous or energetic enough to have had their interests promoted to a lifestyle."
And I don't agree with having someone else's taboos enforced on me.
(Which I'm sure some people will read as "I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SAY <<N**R>> AT WORK", but I don't think I can help those people other than ask them to re-read what I wrote)
John McWhorter would. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/30/opinion/john-mcwhorter-n-...
Or perhaps more pertinent to your question: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/11/opinion/use-mention.html
McWhorter thinks it's crazy that the word is such a profanity that even mentioning the word is taboo.
They're right about one thing: It's not particularly professional.