|
|
Post by darkpast on Apr 4, 2019 3:13:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 4, 2019 4:13:53 GMT
Meh. Unless they have concrete proof then their claim is very tenuous. How can 2 women, neither of whom work in finance or HR, know for certain that Disney pays their female employees less than their male employees?
If they're claiming that they feel they themselves (personally) are being unfairly paid then that's different. But it seems like they're claiming Disney is unfair with all women based on their own personal experience... and that's something you can't claim unless you have intimate knowledge of majority of employee salaries and appraisals.
|
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Apr 4, 2019 4:22:37 GMT
In b4 DC-Fan likes this.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Apr 4, 2019 12:33:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Apr 4, 2019 20:22:49 GMT
Meh. Unless they have concrete proof then their claim is very tenuous. How can 2 women, neither of whom work in finance or HR, know for certain that Disney pays their female employees less than their male employees? If they're claiming that they feel they themselves (personally) are being unfairly paid then that's different. But it seems like they're claiming Disney is unfair with all women based on their own personal experience... and that's something you can't claim unless you have intimate knowledge of majority of employee salaries and appraisals. They know because in civil lawsuits, there's these legal documents called subpeonas. The plaintiffs serve Disney with a subpoena requesting the appropriate documents/information and Disney would be required by law to provide the documents/information to the plaintiffs. |
|
|
|
Post by Power Ranger on Apr 4, 2019 22:46:26 GMT
Everyone knew this. That’s why they have only now given a lead to a female after 20 MCU films.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 4, 2019 22:51:09 GMT
Meh. Unless they have concrete proof then their claim is very tenuous. How can 2 women, neither of whom work in finance or HR, know for certain that Disney pays their female employees less than their male employees? If they're claiming that they feel they themselves (personally) are being unfairly paid then that's different. But it seems like they're claiming Disney is unfair with all women based on their own personal experience... and that's something you can't claim unless you have intimate knowledge of majority of employee salaries and appraisals. They know because in civil lawsuits, there's these legal documents called subpeonas. The plaintiffs serve Disney with a subpoena requesting the appropriate documents/information and Disney would be required by law to provide the documents/information to the plaintiffs. You're not using your brain. How would these 2 female employees have known that they were being unequally paid even BEFORE they filed a lawsuit? Obviously they would have needed to know before they filed right? Unless you're telling me they simply guessed? |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 4, 2019 22:56:00 GMT
Everyone knew this. That’s why they have only now given a lead to a female after 20 films. Snow White Cinderella Little Mermaid Frozen Mulan Maleficent Mary Poppins Should I keep going or do you now realize how silly your comment was? |
|
|
|
Post by Power Ranger on Apr 4, 2019 23:13:37 GMT
Everyone knew this. That’s why they have only now given a lead to a female after 20 films. Snow White Cinderella Little Mermaid Frozen Mulan Maleficent Mary Poppins Should I keep going or do you now realize how silly your comment was? I meant MCU films obviously. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 4, 2019 23:17:09 GMT
Snow White Cinderella Little Mermaid Frozen Mulan Maleficent Mary Poppins Should I keep going or do you now realize how silly your comment was? I meant MCU films obviously. Except this thread is about Disney... |
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
 
|
Post by Marendil on Apr 5, 2019 8:37:19 GMT
They know because in civil lawsuits, there's these legal documents called subpeonas. The plaintiffs serve Disney with a subpoena requesting the appropriate documents/information and Disney would be required by law to provide the documents/information to the plaintiffs. You're not using your brain. How would these 2 female employees have known that they were being unequally paid even BEFORE they filed a lawsuit? Obviously they would have needed to know before they filed right? Unless you're telling me they simply guessed? He's talking about part of the legal process known as 'discovery.' It's not unknown in this day and age for suits to be filed solely to allow the plaintiff (the one filing the suit) to go on a fishing expedition through the defendant's records. Abuse of this process is a current legal concern.
So you're right, they couldn't know, but by filing the suit they may be able to find something through discovery subpoenas.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Apr 5, 2019 10:29:31 GMT
Good luck running for president, Bob.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 5, 2019 13:44:34 GMT
You're not using your brain. How would these 2 female employees have known that they were being unequally paid even BEFORE they filed a lawsuit? Obviously they would have needed to know before they filed right? Unless you're telling me they simply guessed? He's talking about part of the legal process known as 'discovery.' It's not unknown in this day and age for suits to be filed solely to allow the plaintiff (the one filing the suit) to go on a fishing expedition through the defendant's records. Abuse of this process is a current legal concern.
So you're right, they couldn't know, but by filing the suit they may be able to find something through discovery subpoenas.
Correct. In short, they filed a lawsuit based on nothing but the hope that their theory is correct. Horrible reason to file a lawsuit. |
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Apr 5, 2019 14:04:52 GMT
He's talking about part of the legal process known as 'discovery.' It's not unknown in this day and age for suits to be filed solely to allow the plaintiff (the one filing the suit) to go on a fishing expedition through the defendant's records. Abuse of this process is a current legal concern.
So you're right, they couldn't know, but by filing the suit they may be able to find something through discovery subpoenas.
Correct. In short, they filed a lawsuit based on a hunch and just hope they're lucky enough to be correct. Horrible reason to file a lawsuit. Ethically yes, but monetarily perhaps not. As suggested above by the board moderator the very filing of the suit might have repercussions even if it's totally unfounded and spurious, encouraging a settlement before the the process goes much further. Plus with enough data and a little applied sophistry you can prove just about anything to a sympathetic jury, allowing for the possibility of a windfall award. Even if you lose you can make the process so punishing to the defendant your next target pays up without a fight.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Apr 5, 2019 17:08:48 GMT
They know because in civil lawsuits, there's these legal documents called subpeonas. The plaintiffs serve Disney with a subpoena requesting the appropriate documents/information and Disney would be required by law to provide the documents/information to the plaintiffs. You're not using your brain. How would these 2 female employees have known that they were being unequally paid even BEFORE they filed a lawsuit? Obviously they would have needed to know before they filed right? Unless you're telling me they simply guessed? I just read the brief linked in the Deadline piece, there's a new amendment to existing law in CA called the California Fair Pay Act which prohibits employers from preventing employees discussing salary. The complaint is mostly based on the claims of LaRonda Rasmussen, Karen Moore's seems so contrived you wonder why she was included.
Sifting out the misleading items (they repeatedly compare her salary to Senior Managers when she was only a Manager) what it amounts to is she was hired at $70k and after several (9 or so) years was only making a little over $100k and thought she deserved a raise and got a big one but her new $138k salary was slightly below the $143k average of male managers so she filed suit. She was making significantly (~20%) less than the average male before her big raise but then again she was fairly new at the job and before the big raise had still seen her compensation increase ~7% per year so if the average male had 3 more years on the job it would figure they'd make more. It was damned curious they omitted the time served at the position with salaries increasing so rapidly and whether or not any males received big 'equity adjustments' at the same time LaRonda Rasmussen and three women did.
They demanded a jury trial, no surprise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 5, 2019 17:20:10 GMT
You're not using your brain. How would these 2 female employees have known that they were being unequally paid even BEFORE they filed a lawsuit? Obviously they would have needed to know before they filed right? Unless you're telling me they simply guessed? I just read the brief linked in the Deadline piece, there's a new amendment to existing law in CA called the California Fair Pay Act which prohibits employers from preventing employees discussing salary. The complaint is mostly based on the claims of LaRonda Rasmussen, Karen Moore's seems so contrived you wonder why she was included.
Sifting out the misleading items (they repeatedly compare her salary to Senior Managers when she was only a Manager) what it amounts to is she was hired at $70k and after several (9 or so) years was only making a little over $100k and thought she deserved a raise and got a big one but her new $138k salary was slightly below the $143k average of male managers so she filed suit. She was making significantly (~20%) less than the average male before her big raise but then again she was fairly new at the job and before the big raise had still seen her compensation increase ~7% per year so if the average male had 3 more years on the job it would figure they'd make more.
They demanded a jury trial, no surprise.
Hold up. Was she comparing her salary to the "average male manager" from any other company or just Disney male managers specifically? Because comparing her salary to the average male manager across the US is not proof that Disney is biased against female employees (who knows if they pay their male managers lower than average too?). But if she's saying she gets paid lower than the average Disney male manager, that means she would have needed to interview a good majority of male Disney managers and convinced them to disclose their salaries to her. Seems shady either way.
|
|
Marendil
Sophomore
@marendil
Posts: 750
Likes: 301
|
Post by Marendil on Apr 5, 2019 17:31:19 GMT
I just read the brief linked in the Deadline piece, there's a new amendment to existing law in CA called the California Fair Pay Act which prohibits employers from preventing employees discussing salary. The complaint is mostly based on the claims of LaRonda Rasmussen, Karen Moore's seems so contrived you wonder why she was included.
Sifting out the misleading items (they repeatedly compare her salary to Senior Managers when she was only a Manager) what it amounts to is she was hired at $70k and after several (9 or so) years was only making a little over $100k and thought she deserved a raise and got a big one but her new $138k salary was slightly below the $143k average of male managers so she filed suit. She was making significantly (~20%) less than the average male before her big raise but then again she was fairly new at the job and before the big raise had still seen her compensation increase ~7% per year so if the average male had 3 more years on the job it would figure they'd make more.
They demanded a jury trial, no surprise.
Hold up. Was she comparing her salary to the "average male manager" from any other company or just Disney male managers specifically? Because comparing her salary to the average male manager across the US is not proof that Disney is biased against female employees (who knows if they pay their male managers lower than average too?). But if she's saying she gets paid lower than the average Disney male manager, that means she would have needed to interview a good majority of male Disney managers and convinced them to disclose their salaries to her. Seems shady either way. Just Disney managers, I summarized the relevant (factual) allegations in the brief above. What's most curious is the information omitted, especially as the complaint is almost completely based on one fairly new manager in a field where salaries were increasing rapidly.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Apr 5, 2019 20:41:10 GMT
He's talking about part of the legal process known as 'discovery.' It's not unknown in this day and age for suits to be filed solely to allow the plaintiff (the one filing the suit) to go on a fishing expedition through the defendant's records. Abuse of this process is a current legal concern.
So you're right, they couldn't know, but by filing the suit they may be able to find something through discovery subpoenas.
Correct. In short, they filed a lawsuit based on nothing but the hope that their theory is correct. The plaintiffs' lawyers might have gotten inside information from a whistleblower within Disney. So the lawsuit is more than just a theory. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 5, 2019 20:56:45 GMT
Correct. In short, they filed a lawsuit based on nothing but the hope that their theory is correct. The plaintiffs' lawyers might have gotten inside information from a whistleblower within Disney. So the lawsuit is more than just a theory. Do you have proof of this or is this just a random theory on your part?
|
|
|
|
Post by gljbradley on Apr 6, 2019 8:03:09 GMT
SMH.
|
|
