14 Sep There is no appeasing a maniac
The cosmetic company, Estee Lauder, has always gone out of it way to avoid violating federal overreach, er, law, no matter how ridiculous or insane said policy may have been. Even when federal involved brain dead political sloganeering and high level tokenism, they went along with it, despite the obvious costs of such idiocy (alienating consumers, corrupting the corporate power structure, etc. (And, no, brain dead SJWs aren’t consumers, their allowance won’t let them buy anything more than a few cases of chips to tide them over at their computers in moms basement as they go from protest to protest in search of an acceptable employer)).
Still, as it always is, it wasn’t enough for the voracious harpies who pollute our legal system, they wanted to get a political sacrifice, to show everyone that despite the victories of President Trump and his appointment of a slew of living human beings (as opposed to the usual zombie crusaders) to run the various departments of government, they still had power. And what’s more, they intended to use it.
So, they found something over at Estee Lauder. Never mind that Lauder had always cooperated with the various antics of the feds, they were an available target and, by golly, that meant that they would be utilized as such. An example would be made, and the lowly peons, they would learn to fear the endless reach, the formidable might of the government once more.
Presumably, they also watch game of thrones as soon as it comes out.
So, what did Estee Lauder do, anyway, besides help women look beautiful?
Well, nothing, it turns out. See, the company had a policy whereby primary caregivers, whether this be the mother or her surrogate, would have six weeks of leave after the birth of a child, followed by four weeks of flexible scheduling so the caregiver could ease back into work. Secondary caregivers got two weeks.
Alright, stage is set. Enter an employee who wants to get six weeks of leave for a newborn, he only gets two. He presses for the full six, and claims to be a primary caregiver. The company explains primary caregiver meant the mother or her surrogate, so unless he was being a surrogate, he couldn’t get six weeks. Instead of then claiming to be a surrogate, however, as this would have immediately qualified him for the full package, he sued for sexual discrimination.
He has no case.
Still, the EEOC finally had itself a scapegoat. Throwing in some kind words referencing Lauders compliant passed, presumably to ease the sting of betrayal, the agency proudly declared this a case of sexual discrimination, immediately hoisting the flags and sailing off to the courtroom, where a (hopefully) compliant Judge would help them stick it to Lauder, and they would have another head to put on a spike, even here in the era of Trump.
Mr., President, DRAIN THAT SWAMP!