Microsoft's new Indian-American CEO sticks his foot innit!

[sundaymorningstaple]

Sounds just something a subcontinental would say, if you look at the treatment of women in India in general.....

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech ... 768237.cms

[movingtospore]

Hey is so going to pay for that. Face-palm moment...

[zzm9980]

It seems to have been really taken out of context honestly. It was a silly thing he was saying, but not intentionally anti-woman.

[ecureilx]

It seems to have been really taken out of context honestly. It was a silly thing he was saying, but not intentionally anti-woman.

I too felt he was quoted out of context .. then again, if you are head of MS, you should be careful what you say ..

[rajagainstthemachine]

I think he did a wd40 there

[nakatago]

I think he did a wd40 there

Lol.

@SMS: Not really subcontinental to me but more old, white American corporate executive male. He's fitting in quite nicely in 'murica, in my opinion.

[zzm9980]

I think he did a wd40 there

Lol.

@SMS: Not really subcontinental to me but more old, white American corporate executive male. He's fitting in quite nicely in 'murica, in my opinion.

Oh come on, do you think a CEO anywhere else wouldn't have done the same? Or even have given the interview he did? You have to look at it in complete context. This was a long flowing conversation. His point was different then his words, and of those words one small section was taken extremely out of context. It was obvious his answer was directed at *everyone*, not women specifically.

And I am *not* a Microsoft fan.

[sundaymorningstaple]

No doubt it was taken out of context, but with all that has been going on in Indian in recent years re: treatment of Indians, you would have thought he would have really tiptoed through that minefield.

[PNGMK]

He sounds rapey.

[JR8]

It's like he simply stated that there isn't 'positive discrimination for women' as it's simply not required as the policies are perfectly balanced anyway, but the vested interests took that as a cue to assault him on allegations of glaring mistreatment of women.

The 'women's movement' do themselves no favours with this kind of nonsense!

[Strong Eagle]

It's like he simply stated that there isn't 'positive discrimination for women' as it's simply not required as the policies are perfectly balanced anyway, but the vested interests took that as a cue to assault him on allegations of glaring mistreatment of women.

The 'women's movement' do themselves no favours with this kind of nonsense!

Except for one small point... the policies and playing field for women are not at all balanced. He did put his foot into it. Would he have told a man the same thing?

[zzm9980]

It's like he simply stated that there isn't 'positive discrimination for women' as it's simply not required as the policies are perfectly balanced anyway, but the vested interests took that as a cue to assault him on allegations of glaring mistreatment of women.

The 'women's movement' do themselves no favours with this kind of nonsense!

Except for one small point... the policies and playing field for women are not at all balanced. He did put his foot into it. Would he have told a man the same thing?

Yes, I believe he would have. If you read the whole response, it seems pretty obvious it is aimed at everyone to "trust HR" to make sure things are fair. At least in large US MNCs, I'd say he's right.

[zzm9980]

It's like he simply stated that there isn't 'positive discrimination for women' as it's simply not required as the policies are perfectly balanced anyway, but the vested interests took that as a cue to assault him on allegations of glaring mistreatment of women.

The 'women's movement' do themselves no favours with this kind of nonsense!

Agree 1000%.

[Strong Eagle]

...it seems pretty obvious it is aimed at everyone to "trust HR" to make sure things are fair. At least in large US MNCs, I'd say he's right.

Surely, you jest. American HR practices, beginning with the large MNC's, are a horror show, based not on the needs of the workers and company, but on the needs of HR.

[PNGMK]

...it seems pretty obvious it is aimed at everyone to "trust HR" to make sure things are fair. At least in large US MNCs, I'd say he's right.

Surely, you jest. American HR practices, beginning with the large MNC's, are a horror show, based not on the needs of the workers and company, but on the needs of HR.

Agreed. American companies (and I am sure MS) are absolutely draconian in their treatment of people and I would NOT trust them to make sure me and women are paid the same. One of the key KPI's for most HR departments in MNC's is keeping salary costs low afterall.