Lawsuit: Bitwarden Fired Employee for Listing Pronouns as “Assigned by God”
reclaimthenet.org
reclaimthenet.org
this seems more likely to be the real reason for the firing, rather than anything he listed in his own Slack profile. (though the Slack shenanigans probably helped show a pattern of behavior)
it sounds like he interviewed a candidate who was either transgender or non-binary, and intentionally misgendered the candidate in the interview notes.
that's a hostile work environment lawsuit waiting to happen, especially if he as a VP would have been in the management chain of that prospective employee, and would have continued the misgendering once they were hired.
if I have a religious belief that sexual harassment is totally fine, that belief does not give me free reign to commit sexual harassment and expose my employer to lawsuits. you'd think someone at the VP level would understand that.
If it could be won. It takes extremes for an effective lawsuit. Now they have a religious discrimination lawsuit. What is more likely is that this promotes a work environment that drives certain people away, which is something else his boss wouldn't want, and would have reason to fire him over.
As someone with OCD the fact that others tolerate my continuing use of a mask still doesn't make me comfortable when they refrain from using masks around me.
> Scharf, in internal writings, did not use the “preferred pronoun” of a potential employee.
Sounds like "Assigned by God" didn't respect the religious freedom of others, and was probably fired for creating a hostile work environment.
The suit is saying that Bitwarden, by asking an individual to confirm their pronouns, tried to compel speak that went against "Assigned by God's" religion. Unless an individual's religion doesn't have pronouns and renounces them, I really don't see how that infringes on freedom of religion.
Yeah the correct spelling of the word is good to have there ya go.
This is a very very generous description of why he was fired. Generous to the fired person.
A ridiculous comparison.
> refuse to yield my vegetarian beliefs to good host ideology.
Nobody was asking this person to yield a belief.
Just strawmen all around.
But I don't actually want to continue this conversation with you. I appreciate your point of you, I just do not agree with it in any capacity. Best of luck and have a good day.
Oh well. Hope he learns from his childish behavior.
It's of the form "Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer only yes or no."
To be as brief as possible the typical objections to doing something like that are that it directly supports the societal changes that see the use of pronouns as a personal preference of the referent, and indirectly signals to others that may likewise object that he doesn't object when he actually does (i.e. that they're in a smaller minority than they actually are) or they should go along regardless.
Asking what's your name, your pronouns, etc have weak implications. Most people have names and prefer certain pronouns. That's the beginning and the end of the implication. Catholics do have pronouns, they just believe in the standard he/him, she/her and that those pronouns correlate with genital from birth.
Some people have gender neutral names and, like sarcasm, gender identity doesn't convey well in text based communications- in this suit, Slack.
Confirming up front rather than in request-response, error-correction type exchanges saves some time and some feelings. It doesn't infringe on religious freedom, as it's simply asking for clarification so others may respect your beliefs. At the same time, you can believe one thing, and respect the beliefs of others and use their name/pronouns when speaking to/of them.
This is also useful in multinational companies. We have hires in other countries, and other cultures, and without reference, I find myself referring to them as they/them... same with some names that could be either Male or Female (Jack springs to mind).
Even more amusing if God is called to testify in court.