See further down the thread. I’m aware that optically that does t look good for your case but scale of organization matters 15 person company all men vs 300 person company chances are at some point a more qualified women has shown up for some interview at the 300 person company but once you get that large the ceo/president isn’t directly involved with all new hires
Yeah, I bowed out of reading the exchange. Everyone here gets into it with TheImpossible1 at some point. I agree with both of you on most points. The problem with arguing against him is you'll often find you're in agreement in general but disagreement in degree.
I'd argue that once you hit 5 employees you're reached critical mass for a lawsuit. Remember, it's not about truth, it's about perception. If the suit makes it to a jury, your organization will become a stand-in for all the "shitty" bosses the female jury members ever had.
See further down the thread. I’m aware that optically that does t look good for your case but scale of organization matters 15 person company all men vs 300 person company chances are at some point a more qualified women has shown up for some interview at the 300 person company but once you get that large the ceo/president isn’t directly involved with all new hires
Yeah, I bowed out of reading the exchange. Everyone here gets into it with TheImpossible1 at some point. I agree with both of you on most points. The problem with arguing against him is you'll often find you're in agreement in general but disagreement in degree.
I'd argue that once you hit 5 employees you're reached critical mass for a lawsuit. Remember, it's not about truth, it's about perception. If the suit makes it to a jury, your organization will become a stand-in for all the "shitty" bosses the female jury members ever had.