> Separately, Jong has also alleged that Apple subjected her to a hostile work environment after a senior member of her team, Blaine Weilert, sexually harassed her. After she complained, Apple investigated and Weilert reportedly admitted to touching her "in a sexually suggestive manner without her consent," the complaint said. Apple then disciplined Weilert but ultimately would not allow Jong to escape the hostile work environment, requiring that she work with Weilert on different projects. Apple later promoted Weilert.
> As a result of Weilert's promotion, the complaint said that Apple placed Weilert in a desk "sitting adjacent" to Jong's in Apple’s offices. Following a request to move her desk, a manager allegedly "questioned" Jong's "willingness to perform her job and collaborate" with Weilert, advising that she be “professional, respectful, and collaborative,” rather than honoring her request for a non-hostile workplace.
This is disgusting. She was sexually assaulted and rightly wanted to get away from her abuser, and a manager pulls the "team player" card. I "question" this manager's ability to think, because that is super fucking dumb.
No wonder she got PTSD, she was put in an impossible situation by toxic leadership that looked out for her abuser and not her.
It always baffles me how widespread behavior like this is. Is this shitty men covering for each other, trying to ensure the behaviour they want to be able to engage with remains acceptable? Or what?
Because it costs almost nothing to do the right thing in a situation like this, and just be a decent human being and yet we're seeing the pattern over and over and over.
I've heard this said that men are promoted based on "talent" or "promise" or "potential" while women are promoted based only on results. Results are a lot harder than hype. Especially if people don't believe in you and would love to watch you fail. It's really easy to sabotage someone's entire career.
It really depends. In some companies/countries, women in IT are being coddled, with way easier criteria for interviews and more leeway for mistakes/poor performance. I suppose that is being done to increase the number of women in the workplace and balance things out.
Some are well aware of this and fully take advantage of the situation, playing damsel in distress, some even manipulate their more socially/sexually frustrated male colleagues into doing their work for them and covering for them.
Police force? FireFighter? Do they have to lift the same?
If you're hiring to fill out a 4 person tech team and you've got 3 men, and a quota 50% male/female split, would you say men have an equal chance at the job. Or less of a chance?
Being intellectually honest, you will admit the criteria for the men in that case are harder, or perhaps impossible to achieve.
If the criteria for one sex are significantly harder (impossible without gender affirming care) then the criteria for the other sex are easier.
I've never ever heard of a quota where I do interviewing, which is tech. As the article is about Apple I thought tech was assumed, and not the roles you are talking about, which are obviously different and I have no experience in.
