I truly love the two post from these individuals. Definitely intelligent and thoughtful about the current state of Chevron:
Poster 1: @1kui+1dKt6RAp
Each of you that are getting upset about the post are just falling into the trap of pointing out the Chevron Way does not exist anymore.
I think the original OP feels threatened from Chevron's big move to put more women in leadership positions. When you give one gender, race, or other preferential treatment on getting a job, by sheer definition you are discriminating against another gender, race, etc. Chevron has absolutely discriminated against white males in the last several years. We all just need to agree with that point. Chevron is attempting to correct a years long bias culture and in this attempt, very good white men are getting let go.
It this ok? Do two wrongs make a right? The chairman is creating his legacy and just like in war, there are winners and losers. The winners are the women moving into these leadership roles and the losers are the men they are displacing. The women see this as a great move forward into financial freedom and unfortunately, some of the men are finding themselves in financial ruin.
The big key here is no matter what side of the coin you are on, you need to always be courteous and find you own solution. Bragging that you kicked a guy out of a job and stating there is more to come only incites people. Telling everyone you are a victim and resorting to name calling only incites people.
Find your own positive path forward. Remember, there is always two sides to a coin. Win-Win does not exist in Chevron. For every winner, there must be a loser. Once again, find your own positive path regardless of which side of the coin you land.
Poster 2: @1lnh+1dKt6RAp
"The big key here is no matter what side of the coin you are on..."
The respondent appears to make the case that there is no moral obligation on this new direction. You either "win" or "lose" and your level of support on "visual diversity" depends on your personal outcome.
Or to say it another way, "He's Ying and She's Yang" so everyone's point is equally valid.
NO. There is a moral obligation here. Discrimination is unjust.
I don't care who it's helping.
A righteous end does not justify ungodly means.
If "visual diversity" is the cover phrase applied to inflict discrimination on a fellow employee it should be called out in the meeting/e-mail/discussion immediately & respectfully. This will take fortitude and resolve by supervisors and managers - both male & female alike.