Axed data scientist sues IBM claiming he was discriminated against as a man
SerendipityJane · 29/03/2022 12:52
(From the US of A)
Michael Stickler, a former IBM data scientist, has sued Big Blue for gender discrimination and retaliation after he complained that he was not being offered the same family leave options available to his women colleagues.
RoseslnTheHospital · 29/03/2022 12:59
I don't know enough about the relevant laws, but do they cover caring for someone else's child? This was his (unmarried) partner's child that he wouldn't have had parental responsibility for. Surely that's the difference here between this case, and a woman having time off to care for her own child.
EmpressCixi · 29/03/2022 13:09
This was in New York and the New York Paid Family Leave law includes domestic partners and their children in the definition of an employee’s “family” since 2016. They’ve just expanded it to include siblings.
So I think he may have a case as his employer refused him the NY paid Family leave.
MangyInseam · 29/03/2022 13:46
Yes, I think he does have a case.
I think over the next 10 years we may see a lot more cases around discrimination of men, among other people, as so many more affirmative action type policies are being implemented in hiring. The Harvard cases being an example of that.
And I can see maternity benefits and benefits for women being another possibility. Once you decide that policy or law that differentiates between sexed bodies is inherently discriminatory it leads to some odd outcomes.
KimikosNightmare · 30/03/2022 20:45
No it isn't relevant whether he was the parent or not. The issue is whether women in similar circumstances offered better leave provisions.
Cbes · 30/03/2022 20:54
Although there needs to be some form of provision for where it doesn’t apply. e.g. maternity leave is for the mother to physically heal, in addition to caring for and bonding with her child.
RoseslnTheHospital · 30/03/2022 21:27
Yes, Kimiko, that's what I was saying, that I didn't know enough about the relevant laws and policies to know if they applied to step children of unmarried partners. It's been clarified that these laws/policies do cover children in that situation. So it sounds like he has a case.
What I also don't know is whether he will have to prove that he was treated differently to a woman in the same position, and that it was because he was a man. Rather than just that his supervisor didn't like him for other reasons. Is it sufficient to show different treatment without needing to establish the cause?
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.