Microsoft Lays Off Entire DEI Team: ‘No Longer Business Critical’

[240B]

Trending Politics
Chris Powell
July 16, 2024

Microsoft has made a notable change in its corporate structure: the major company is dismantling its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) team. A team leader declared the initiatives “no longer needed,” leading to layoffs within the group. The exact number of affected employees remains undisclosed, and the identity of the team leader who sent the email has not been revealed.

“True systems-change work associated with DEI programs everywhere are no longer business critical or smart as they were in 2020,” said an email sent to thousands of employees, obtained by Business Insider. The email stated that the DEI team was eliminated because of “changing business needs” as of July 1.

“Unofficially in my opinion, not specific to Microsoft alone, but [conservative policy plan] Project 2025 looms and true systems change work associated with DEI programs everywhere are no longer business critical or smart as they were in 2020. Hence the purposeful and strategic 3-5 year shelf life of many company’s inclusion commitments post the murder of George Floyd are being reevaluated,” the email explained.

(more)
https://trendingpoliticsnews.com/microsoft-lays-off-entire-dei-team-no-longer-business-critical-mace/

[LMAO]

Good for them

[Wingnut]

I guess DEI is no longer stylish.  Well except for in the USSS.

[LMAO]

I guess DEI is no longer stylish.  Well except for in the USSS.

That’s the difference between the public sector versus the private sector

The public sector doesn’t care about things like efficiency and competency

[Wingnut]

That’s the difference between the public sector versus the private sector

The public sector doesn’t care about things like efficiency and competency

Ain't that the truth.

[Ghost Bear]

They may have laid off some people, but they haven't abandoned their adherence to DEI. Instead of having an easily-identifiable team, the concepts are being embedded directly in their business practices. The article posted says this:

In a statement to Business Wire, spokesperson Jeff Jones said, “Our D&I commitments remain unchanged. Our focus on diversity and inclusion is unwavering and we are holding firm on our expectations, prioritizing accountability, and continuing to focus on this work.”

They're just trying to hide it so that it is harder to sue them for it.

[DefiantMassRINO]

So, still "heterosexual white Christian males of Western European descent need not apply" at Microsoft?

They may have laid off some people, but they haven't abandoned their adherence to DEI. Instead of having an easily-identifiable team, the concepts are being embedded directly in their business practices. The article posted says this:

They're just trying to hide it so that it is harder to sue them for it.

[Ghost Bear]

So, still "heterosexual white Christian males of Western European descent need not apply" at Microsoft?

Yes, they are just being more sneaky about it.

[Sighlass]

Still some liberal arts schools are sweating that yet another degree does not equate jobs in the real world.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

They are consuming oxygen that the rest of us could be breathing. Eliminate them.

[Kamaji]

They may have laid off some people, but they haven't abandoned their adherence to DEI. Instead of having an easily-identifiable team, the concepts are being embedded directly in their business practices. The article posted says this:

They're just trying to hide it so that it is harder to sue them for it.

[Smokin Joe]

They are consuming oxygen that the rest of us could be breathing. Eliminate them.

Wrong approach.

They are emitting Carbon Dioxide!

[roamer_1]

DEI has been dead-man-walking since Butt Light.

[The_Reader_David]

That’s the difference between the public sector versus the private sector

The public sector doesn’t care about things like efficiency and competency

You're assuming we still have capitalism in which the bottom line and thus the profits for the owners are what drives corporate policty.  We do not.  James Burnham was early thinking it had arrived in 1949, but by now we certainly live under managerialism, in which it is not the capitalists, but the professional managers who are in charge.  They don't care about efficiency and comptency whether they are in the public or private sector (and they rotate between the two). They care about what increases their agency's power when in the public sector and what increases their bonus when in the private.  Meeting DEI targets or "carbon neutrality" targets are a whole lot easier than delivering value to the shareholders, and guess what, the managers can decide to key each others bonuses to those, rather than to share price or profits.

[MeganC]

You're assuming we still have capitalism in which the bottom line and thus the profits for the owners are what drives corporate policty.  We do not.  James Burnham was early thinking it had arrived in 1949, but by now we certainly live under managerialism, in which it is not the capitalists, but the professional managers who are in charge.  They don't care about efficiency and comptency whether they are in the public or private sector (and they rotate between the two). They care about what increases their agency's power when in the public sector and what increases their bonus when in the private.  Meeting DEI targets or "carbon neutrality" targets are a whole lot easier than delivering value to the shareholders, and guess what, the managers can decide to key each others bonuses to those, rather than to share price or profits.

BTTT!