DP = Discriminated Person

I've spent the last several years helping multiple Silicon Valley, Austin and other tech companies discriminate against qualified persons of color, females, and the disabled. I'm tired of it. I want to blow the whistle, but what should I watch out for?

Not saying I'm proud of it, but I want to blow the whistle on how it was done. Here are some of the ways I helped do this:

  • Create "unicorn" job listings that very few people can actually fill. When a DP applicant applies and is not able to fulfill the strict job requirements, pass them up. However, when a non-DP applicant applies with a satisfactory level of experience and skills, take them.
    • In the event that a DP applicant matches a unicorn role (rare), interview them and require senior-level skills in multiple other disciplines for the role.
    • Ensure that the DP applicant is asked lots of obscure questions unrelated to the job. If they fail on a single question, it's enough to disqualify them from the process.
  • Punish DP candidates who make it through the hiring wall by giving them unrealistic goals and deadlines, and holding them to a much higher standard than everyone else. Usually they'll get fed up and quit, but if they don't we can fire them for "unsatisfactory performance." Never had an issue with constructive dismissals because we stack the "evidence" against them from the beginning. Many times we outright fabricate it.
    • If they somehow get past this, we just deny them promotions for various reasons.
  • Create strict "culture fit" rules that DP applicants generally can't fit into, and pass them up based on "not a cultural fit" reasons.

These controls basically ensure DP applicants never really get a chance, and if they do, everything is stacked against them. It helps the companies save lots of money on accommodations, and prevents a significant amount of lawsuits.

I've helped successfully defend against multiple EEOC lawsuits simply by showing the candidate was not qualified for the position, or didn't perform their job well enough. Either we stack the evidence against them from the beginning, or outright fabricate it.

  • 3
    Talk to a lawyer. – BlueDogRanch Jul 14 '18 at 0:03
  • We can't give you legal advice here. – Nate Eldredge Jul 14 '18 at 3:09
  • Eye-opening. Thanks for coming around to doing the right thing. Not to be overly gratuitous here, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't really curious what some of the strict "culture fit" rules could be. – A.fm. Jul 14 '18 at 8:32
  • Could you share some more details? I'm sure there are many people interested in this information. – user626528 May 29 '19 at 22:14

You need to talk to a lawyer.

There are lots of whistleblower laws that could be implicated by the course of conduct you're talking about, but they are not always as robust as the average person might expect. Protecting your rights can often depend on some silly formalities, and you need a lawyer to look at your specific situation and craft a plan to ensure that your rights are protected and your whistleblowing actually gets heard.

Some of these laws can also come with handsome financial implications, so I suspect it would not be terribly difficult to find a lawyer who would be interested in going through this with you.

| improve this answer | |

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.