Thread regarding ConocoPhillips layoffs

DE&I promotion rates

Anyone catch in the latest DE&I dashboard that women are getting promoted at a 40% higher rate than men? Numbers from 2021 are similar. If that’s not progress, I don’t know what is!

by
| 2451 views | | 19 replies (last September 8, 2023) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1o1SvAiL

19 replies (most recent on top)

I came out to my boss that I was a minority female and the next day I jumped 4 SGLs. Only issue now is finding size 13 high heels.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @uymg+1o1SvAiL

If you really want to see your promotion, check out the women who pretend to have a mental illness. If you can tap into that gold, mine you are set for life. HR wouldn’t dare touch you know, matter, how incompetent or completely unproductive you are.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qboy+1o1SvAiL

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character…”

Or gender

We’ve lost the character and quality battle and replaced it with quotas and brown nosers. Not a long term win for us.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @olez+1o1SvAiL

Cool story. Lots of variables to account for. Where are these women and companies in a country who is culture traditionally valued their input? Were they there based on merit or based on a quarter system? I often wonder what the statistics would produce if we looked at things like eyecolor and number of fillings among other things.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kklt+1o1SvAiL

Previous poster - those statistics sounds like an easily manipulated stat that would be easily skewed to tell a desired narrative and fit an agenda. I dont know, but I can guess, that correlation doesn't equal causation in the case of having less representation on a board. That being said, from a board perspective, it is never a bad thing to have diverse thoughts/experiences. . . .no matter whose brain those came out of (man, woman, black, white, etc)

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kjog+1o1SvAiL

In response to the question about how diversity makes more money for shareholders: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/securities-law/board-diversity-is-critical-to-protect-shareholders-bottom-line

"Companies with a market capitalization of more than $10 billion and with women on their boards outperform comparable businesses with all-male boards by 26% worldwide over a period of six years."

"Companies with gender-diverse boards have fewer instances of problematic business practices, such as fraud, corruption, bribery, and shareholder battles, and are associated with more transparent disclosure of stock price information and fewer financial reporting mistakes."

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kxnu+1o1SvAiL

DEI isn’t about creating shareholder value - it’s all about messaging and brand management. It’s to keep us off the front page of the WSJ when they run stories about the lack of minorities in large companies.

Low carbon is similar.

DEI is discrimination masked as virtue.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jnvt+1o1SvAiL

If it’s so obvious, please spell it out. How does increasing “diversity” increase value to the shareholders?
I’ll wait.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @iewj+1o1SvAiL

You don't see why providing more opportunities for women would be a good thing? Seems pretty obvious

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hhgc+1o1SvAiL

Still waiting on an answer on why it’s such a good thing. Anybody care to venture a properly documented example of how increasing “diversity” makes more money for shareholders?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gqwa+1o1SvAiL

Previous poster: Why?
Serious question.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fkpd+1o1SvAiL

I saw that north slope was something like 90% male and other field offices are 80% plus. Given the focus on diversity and inclusion it seems this is a tremendous opportunity to show we take this issue seriously and will address these disparities.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @elvy+1o1SvAiL

Correct. They’re complaining loudly to anyone in earshot about how badly they’re being treated as they collect their bonuses, promotions, time off, and fawning praise.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @8smz+1o1SvAiL

A bet your female peers aren’t whining on anonymous forums. Maybe that is how they are getting promoted

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @8snj+1o1SvAiL

Oh it’s progress alright. In the wrong direction. Discrimination against one gender to make up for past discrimination against another is not equitable in any world. It just shifts the problem. Not a good look, COP.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6xzm+1o1SvAiL

The discovery process in the lawsuit will be fascinating. Note to COP: retain all records and communications.
Live free or DEI!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3amv+1o1SvAiL

I suspect we have more women in early career roles (ie younger) and this would align to college enrollment. When you’re sub 35, promotions are more clockwork and this is affecting the overall female/male promotion ratio as men are weighted more heavily in the mid to late career demographic where promotions are harder to come by.

If not, then yes, I think it would be discriminatory.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qxg+1o1SvAiL

Smart Growth, Superior Returns, SPIRIT Values!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vtx+1o1SvAiL

I choose to call it discrimination.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gjm+1o1SvAiL

Post a reply

: