Noticed one strange pattern. In every director team I have seen, if they have female employees then the pick between male:female employee surplussed is always almost 50:50 even though the team doesn’t comprise of male:female ratio to be 50:50. 2020 USA and the work environment is still not conducive and gender biased.
18 replies (most recent on top)
No surprise. Especially in technical roles. Men are in control, even when the decision maker is not a man. Maybe some day this will change.....
At my last AVPs retirement party 17 people spoke, 16 were men.
This gender bias is a complete joke. So many under qualified women in top slots.
So here is what happened to me as an older minority female employee. I had been with the company for years working weekends, night and holidays. I always had good reviews. A much younger male employee didn’t like working with older women. He was rude and difficult with any that crossed his path. I got stuck working with this prick. He complained about every little thing I did or didn’t do. I ended up having to go to daily 9:00am status meetings with my female boss daily. I explained this situation and was told that I needed to work with him as I had attempted to do on many occasions. I was fired for poor performance and black-listed from the company when I walked out of a meeting where he was brow beating me in front of other team members. He had done this before in a much larger meeting with my boss present and another vendor present. She never took up for me in that meeting. In the corporate world, the old woman is the first fired, last hired no matter what. A man even if he is poor performer will chosen to stay on the job over a woman anytime.
When I was hired in 2001, there were two of us, both graduated from the same school, same year, same high standing in grades. We were hired for the same job title performing the exact same job duties. He was hired at 5K more than I. The only difference is, I am female. He brought up salary in a conversation, he assumed I was paid the same. Women are definitely treated differently
Not sure about gender bias in the surpluses. However, as a male who has been in the software industry a long time (and only recently at ATT), I am rather surprised at how poorly technical women are treated in the company. I've observed that women are interrupted far more often, are not encouraged to take technical lead roles, and are not encouraged to give technical presentations, and are even discouraged from talking in meetings. There are several female directors in my larger group, but even those women have what would be viewed as "administrative" roles. I suspect much of this is cultural. If there is a gender bias in the surpluses, it may be because women are not able to take on the more valued roles due to this cultural bias.
In my director group it was 2M 1F. One of the M being me.
Work hard and they won’t pick you. There’s always dead weight below you.
"Team" hahahhaha.
What was the name of your team?
Is your team going to help you?
You people have zero idea how to survive in the corporate world.
Please not relate to gender and race. You should blame wall St. outside pressure is very high, number is matter whatever your race and genders
It’s because we have an arbitration agreement, so they know there class action risk.
However- the arbitration agreement was recently thrown out by a California judge. This could potentially open the door for us to file clad actions.
I don’t think att appealed it.
“ Besides, if you were to sue, T would fight it in the coarts till you died. Only the lawyer would get $. You will be dust before you see a dime.”
I think att would win in court. They’d sue you for being a old id–t, who never did anything, collected a paycheck, had no skills, had no desire to have any skills, yet thought you were in some way relevant?
@xof, I will be charitable and say that you don’t know what you are talking about.
AT&T has more male employees than female employees, and the numbers become more skewed, in favor of men, the higher up the management chain you go.
Lots of opinions and guessing without facts or data to back it up.....pretty useless and negative garbage. AT&T has (or used to have) ~240K employees across numerous companies and BU's. No way to actually know the answer other than speculation.
This may be true, I also notice that there is in general, like peanut butter across the ATT land, a disproportionate number of women to men. So it might make a little sense that more women would get hit than men. One thing I bet, men or women, they are all 50+ getting cut.
After all the m@assacres since 2015, don't you understand that T don't give a $hit about discriminating in every single way possible? Every spreadsheet that whacked folks have shared with me shows clear outlawed discrimination. But Ratty and Stinky are not worried!
You see, when you live pay check to pay check, you got to take that severance. And you sign your rights away to sue, of you forfeit your severance.
Besides, if you were to sue, T would fight it in the coarts till you died. Only the lawyer would get $. You will be dust before you see a dime.
So why should T worry?
That’s what I see in each director team I know of.
You’re saying women at AT&T are laid off at a higher rate than men?