Please cancel your Netflix accounts. I've cancelled my account of almost a decade, and I doubt I'll sign up again unless there's real action on these points. Showing solidarity with these workers...
Please cancel your Netflix accounts. I've cancelled my account of almost a decade, and I doubt I'll sign up again unless there's real action on these points. Showing solidarity with these workers is important.
Seems like a good list of very reasonable things, a lot of which should be standard everywhere. However, can anyone enlighten me on how things like: are supposed to work? It does sound like a good...
Seems like a good list of very reasonable things, a lot of which should be standard everywhere.
However, can anyone enlighten me on how things like:
Hire trans and non-binary content executives, especially BIPOC, in leading positions;
Recruit trans people, especially BIPOC, for leadership roles in the company (Director, VP, etc.)
are supposed to work? It does sound like a good goal, I think diversity is better for everyone.
But let's say about 0.5% of people in the US identify as trans -- you'd statistically need 200 eligible applicants for a VP/leading/director role to have 1 eligible trans applicant. I doubt they have that much eligible applicants for these kinds of roles.
Is the intention then that any eligible trans person that applies kind of should be given the job? And what if someone else is more qualified, even though they're not trans? Should they be passed over?
How many should be hired? Should the amount of trans people in leading roles mirror the 0.5% in society? Should there be more? Let's say 10% of leading roles in a company are trans, are they then not over represented? Is that fair to non-trans people?
Netflix is a huge, huge organization, and trans people are overrepresented in several of the fields they'd be hiring for, namely tech and entertainment. You might be surprised.
But let's say about 0.5% of people in the US identify as trans -- you'd statistically need 200 eligible applicants for a VP/leading/director role to have 1 eligible trans applicant. I doubt they have that much eligible applicants for these kinds of roles.
Netflix is a huge, huge organization, and trans people are overrepresented in several of the fields they'd be hiring for, namely tech and entertainment. You might be surprised.
Netflix has ~12,000 employees. At the very least they can promote internally and train the person. I'm also certain more than 200 people of executive status exist in the world. You are right,...
Netflix has ~12,000 employees. At the very least they can promote internally and train the person. I'm also certain more than 200 people of executive status exist in the world.
You are right, however, that the reality is that they may not be 'qualified' in the same way that anyone who faces marginalization is less likely to be qualified the higher up you look. This is what insitutional bigotry looks like. If you're a member of a group less likely to receive a promotion, or receive praise from your boss, less likely to get hired, less likely to have gone to an expensive or good school, less likely to have had additional resources for education as a child, more likely to be struggling to support yourself or your family, or one of many other possible concerns for someone oppressed by society... well, it means your total job growth is limited in a way that your cis straight white male peers aren't and it means you may need to adjust what 'eligible' looks like based on the population you're hiring from.
Let's say 10% of leading roles in a company are trans, are they then not over represented? Is that fair to non-trans people?
Everyone is already over-represented by cis straight white men and have been historically for, well, basically always. How about we try something else and see how it works out.
Yeah, this is actually a great point. We have a lot of evidence that cis people don't tend to take trans folks' concerns into account - but I seriously doubt the reverse is true!
Everyone is already over-represented by cis straight white men and have been historically for, well, basically always. How about we try something else and see how it works out.
Yeah, this is actually a great point. We have a lot of evidence that cis people don't tend to take trans folks' concerns into account - but I seriously doubt the reverse is true!
As an aside, we actually have some emerging evidence that over-representation by minority groups is good for society and companies along several axes - people who are marginalized tend to take the...
As an aside, we actually have some emerging evidence that over-representation by minority groups is good for society and companies along several axes - people who are marginalized tend to take the concern of others more seriously, make decisions that are better for the long term health of companies, and more.
Please cancel your Netflix accounts. I've cancelled my account of almost a decade, and I doubt I'll sign up again unless there's real action on these points. Showing solidarity with these workers is important.
It's also a good financial idea for me - I think I've watched 3-4 hours of Netflix in the last 6 months.
Seems like a good list of very reasonable things, a lot of which should be standard everywhere.
However, can anyone enlighten me on how things like:
are supposed to work? It does sound like a good goal, I think diversity is better for everyone.
But let's say about 0.5% of people in the US identify as trans -- you'd statistically need 200 eligible applicants for a VP/leading/director role to have 1 eligible trans applicant. I doubt they have that much eligible applicants for these kinds of roles.
Is the intention then that any eligible trans person that applies kind of should be given the job? And what if someone else is more qualified, even though they're not trans? Should they be passed over?
How many should be hired? Should the amount of trans people in leading roles mirror the 0.5% in society? Should there be more? Let's say 10% of leading roles in a company are trans, are they then not over represented? Is that fair to non-trans people?
Netflix is a huge, huge organization, and trans people are overrepresented in several of the fields they'd be hiring for, namely tech and entertainment. You might be surprised.
Netflix has ~12,000 employees. At the very least they can promote internally and train the person. I'm also certain more than 200 people of executive status exist in the world.
You are right, however, that the reality is that they may not be 'qualified' in the same way that anyone who faces marginalization is less likely to be qualified the higher up you look. This is what insitutional bigotry looks like. If you're a member of a group less likely to receive a promotion, or receive praise from your boss, less likely to get hired, less likely to have gone to an expensive or good school, less likely to have had additional resources for education as a child, more likely to be struggling to support yourself or your family, or one of many other possible concerns for someone oppressed by society... well, it means your total job growth is limited in a way that your cis straight white male peers aren't and it means you may need to adjust what 'eligible' looks like based on the population you're hiring from.
Everyone is already over-represented by cis straight white men and have been historically for, well, basically always. How about we try something else and see how it works out.
Yeah, this is actually a great point. We have a lot of evidence that cis people don't tend to take trans folks' concerns into account - but I seriously doubt the reverse is true!
As an aside, we actually have some emerging evidence that over-representation by minority groups is good for society and companies along several axes - people who are marginalized tend to take the concern of others more seriously, make decisions that are better for the long term health of companies, and more.