California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit

Two state agencies in California are intervening in the lawsuit alleging sexual harassment and gender discrimination at League of Legends developer Riot Games. A settlement was reached in the case last summer and it was announced late last year that Riot would pay out at least $10 million to current and former female employees. Now, in what the Los Angeles Times describes as an "unusual step," the state of California is stepping in, saying they believe this payment is inadequate, and that the proper payout should be closer to $400 million. Additionally, one of the agencies objected to the other terms of the deal, saying "no enforceable changes to employment policies, at a company alleged to be rife with sexism, are part of the settlement." Riot has filed rebuttals, and there will be hearings on January 31st and February 3rd to work through this. TheHill has a summary of the pay-walled LA Times article, as well a statement from Riot Games:
“We are particularly dismayed that the filing downplays and ignores the efforts we have made with respect to diversity, inclusion, and culture over the past 18 months. The Settlement Agreement includes a long list of the dozens of meaningful initiatives and changes we have made, including updates to our policies, in response to Kotaku’s reporting and the class action lawsuit. We believe that these initiatives demonstrate a real commitment to actual change that goes well above and beyond what most companies would have done in a similar situation.”
View : : :
31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
31.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 23, 2020, 01:46
31.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 23, 2020, 01:46
Jan 23, 2020, 01:46
 
Play your game and stop WHINING ...jezz
30.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 23, 2020, 00:51
30.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 23, 2020, 00:51
Jan 23, 2020, 00:51
 
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:32:
jacobvandy wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:16:
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 21:48:
I understand that they want to use financial means to deter sexist behaviour, and a high sum is required in order to give enough incentive to change for a company, but why charge "the company / business" at at all? The "company" didn't do anything wrong, it was the individuals working in that company right? So target them, and their wages with fines or whatever the appropriate punishment is. It was individuals who did sexist things, and individuals that covered it up, and individuals that allowed the behaviour to perpeptuate.

It kind of feels like a weird palm off to not recognise that individuals are behind it, and blame a large entity instead. Isn't a bit like trying to sue Hollywood for what Weinstein or Cosby did?

It's all a bit weird to me.


Really, it seems weird to you for a company to be sued over what went on in their offices, during work hours, involving other employees and/or supervisors? The company hired those people, and allowed them to behave the way they did, breaking employment laws in the process. The "company" is not some nebulous entity, disconnected from what goes on within its walls; it is composed of the individuals who control and operate it, some of whom were among the accused. Hollywood is a place.

The company didn't hire anyone though, a manager did, HR did, a CEO did. It was people who let it happen, who didn't change it etc. A company isn't sentient.

Don't get me wrong, if this is how it works to make change, then sure do that, but all I'm saying is it feels weird that the individuals in question aren't really being personally punished.

You might have missed it, but "corporations are people my friend."
To prevent CV-19, avoid the Serious Seven: weddings, funerals, faith-based activities, bars, gyms, house gatherings and other small events.
Avatar 22024
29.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 23:19
29.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 23:19
Jan 22, 2020, 23:19
 
jacobvandy wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 23:07:
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:32:
The company didn't hire anyone though, a manager did, HR did, a CEO did. It was people who let it happen, who didn't change it etc. A company isn't sentient.

Don't get me wrong, if this is how it works to make change, then sure do that, but all I'm saying is it feels weird that the individuals in question aren't really being personally punished.

Now you're contradicting yourself. If a company isn't sentient, then how is it somehow not involved? The managers, HR reps, CEO, and other individuals ARE the company.

The lawsuit was specifically against a company, as a whole, which was accused of wrong-doing. The laws in question are specifically about how business within a company, as a whole, is conducted.

If there are individuals who are accused of breaking different laws, as individuals, then they can and probably will be sued separately. Though we might not hear about it because they aren't famous.

OK yeah, that's what I was wondering about, I just want to make sure the people responsible are actually held to be accountable. The thing that bothers me is when say a CEO is made to leave, but on the way out gets some huge payout, so doesn't really get punished for the wrong doing he encouraged or allowed.
_________________________________________________
"Money doesn't exist in the 24th century, the acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity." - Jean-Luc Picard
28.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 23:17
28.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 23:17
Jan 22, 2020, 23:17
 
Beamer wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:57:
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:32:
jacobvandy wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:16:
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 21:48:
I understand that they want to use financial means to deter sexist behaviour, and a high sum is required in order to give enough incentive to change for a company, but why charge "the company / business" at at all? The "company" didn't do anything wrong, it was the individuals working in that company right? So target them, and their wages with fines or whatever the appropriate punishment is. It was individuals who did sexist things, and individuals that covered it up, and individuals that allowed the behaviour to perpeptuate.

It kind of feels like a weird palm off to not recognise that individuals are behind it, and blame a large entity instead. Isn't a bit like trying to sue Hollywood for what Weinstein or Cosby did?

It's all a bit weird to me.


Really, it seems weird to you for a company to be sued over what went on in their offices, during work hours, involving other employees and/or supervisors? The company hired those people, and allowed them to behave the way they did, breaking employment laws in the process. The "company" is not some nebulous entity, disconnected from what goes on within its walls; it is composed of the individuals who control and operate it, some of whom were among the accused. Hollywood is a place.

The company didn't hire anyone though, a manager did, HR did, a CEO did. It was people who let it happen, who didn't change it etc. A company isn't sentient.

Don't get me wrong, if this is how it works to make change, then sure do that, but all I'm saying is it feels weird that the individuals in question aren't really being personally punished.

You need to read up on agency. The legal term.
If a McDonald's employee poisons the burger you ordered, would you hold McDonald's accountable?

I mean you are talking to someone who thinks fast food is poison here But seriously:

If the McD's thought poisoning burgers was a perk of the job (or a similar attitude as RIOT games) then yes, I would hold McD's responsible, but I would also expect the people who created that culture, and let it persist to be personally accountable as well as the guy doing the poisoning.


_________________________________________________
"Money doesn't exist in the 24th century, the acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity." - Jean-Luc Picard
27.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 23:07
27.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 23:07
Jan 22, 2020, 23:07
 
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:32:
The company didn't hire anyone though, a manager did, HR did, a CEO did. It was people who let it happen, who didn't change it etc. A company isn't sentient.

Don't get me wrong, if this is how it works to make change, then sure do that, but all I'm saying is it feels weird that the individuals in question aren't really being personally punished.

Now you're contradicting yourself. If a company isn't sentient, then how is it somehow not involved? The managers, HR reps, CEO, and other individuals ARE the company.

The lawsuit was specifically against a company, as a whole, which was accused of wrong-doing. The laws in question are specifically about how business within a company, as a whole, is conducted.

If there are individuals who are accused of breaking different laws, as individuals, then they can and probably will be sued separately. Though we might not hear about it because they aren't famous.
26.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 22:57
Beamer
 
26.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 22:57
Jan 22, 2020, 22:57
 Beamer
 
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:32:
jacobvandy wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:16:
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 21:48:
I understand that they want to use financial means to deter sexist behaviour, and a high sum is required in order to give enough incentive to change for a company, but why charge "the company / business" at at all? The "company" didn't do anything wrong, it was the individuals working in that company right? So target them, and their wages with fines or whatever the appropriate punishment is. It was individuals who did sexist things, and individuals that covered it up, and individuals that allowed the behaviour to perpeptuate.

It kind of feels like a weird palm off to not recognise that individuals are behind it, and blame a large entity instead. Isn't a bit like trying to sue Hollywood for what Weinstein or Cosby did?

It's all a bit weird to me.


Really, it seems weird to you for a company to be sued over what went on in their offices, during work hours, involving other employees and/or supervisors? The company hired those people, and allowed them to behave the way they did, breaking employment laws in the process. The "company" is not some nebulous entity, disconnected from what goes on within its walls; it is composed of the individuals who control and operate it, some of whom were among the accused. Hollywood is a place.

The company didn't hire anyone though, a manager did, HR did, a CEO did. It was people who let it happen, who didn't change it etc. A company isn't sentient.

Don't get me wrong, if this is how it works to make change, then sure do that, but all I'm saying is it feels weird that the individuals in question aren't really being personally punished.

You need to read up on agency. The legal term.
If a McDonald's employee poisons the burger you ordered, would you hold McDonald's accountable?
25.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 22:32
25.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 22:32
Jan 22, 2020, 22:32
 
jacobvandy wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 22:16:
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 21:48:
I understand that they want to use financial means to deter sexist behaviour, and a high sum is required in order to give enough incentive to change for a company, but why charge "the company / business" at at all? The "company" didn't do anything wrong, it was the individuals working in that company right? So target them, and their wages with fines or whatever the appropriate punishment is. It was individuals who did sexist things, and individuals that covered it up, and individuals that allowed the behaviour to perpeptuate.

It kind of feels like a weird palm off to not recognise that individuals are behind it, and blame a large entity instead. Isn't a bit like trying to sue Hollywood for what Weinstein or Cosby did?

It's all a bit weird to me.


Really, it seems weird to you for a company to be sued over what went on in their offices, during work hours, involving other employees and/or supervisors? The company hired those people, and allowed them to behave the way they did, breaking employment laws in the process. The "company" is not some nebulous entity, disconnected from what goes on within its walls; it is composed of the individuals who control and operate it, some of whom were among the accused. Hollywood is a place.

The company didn't hire anyone though, a manager did, HR did, a CEO did. It was people who let it happen, who didn't change it etc. A company isn't sentient.

Don't get me wrong, if this is how it works to make change, then sure do that, but all I'm saying is it feels weird that the individuals in question aren't really being personally punished.
_________________________________________________
"Money doesn't exist in the 24th century, the acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity." - Jean-Luc Picard
24.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 22:16
24.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 22:16
Jan 22, 2020, 22:16
 
bigspender wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 21:48:
I understand that they want to use financial means to deter sexist behaviour, and a high sum is required in order to give enough incentive to change for a company, but why charge "the company / business" at at all? The "company" didn't do anything wrong, it was the individuals working in that company right? So target them, and their wages with fines or whatever the appropriate punishment is. It was individuals who did sexist things, and individuals that covered it up, and individuals that allowed the behaviour to perpeptuate.

It kind of feels like a weird palm off to not recognise that individuals are behind it, and blame a large entity instead. Isn't a bit like trying to sue Hollywood for what Weinstein or Cosby did?

It's all a bit weird to me.


Really, it seems weird to you for a company to be sued over what went on in their offices, during work hours, involving other employees and/or supervisors? The company hired those people, and allowed them to behave the way they did, breaking employment laws in the process. The "company" is not some nebulous entity, disconnected from what goes on within its walls; it is composed of the individuals who control and operate it, some of whom were among the accused. Hollywood is a place.
23.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 21:48
23.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 21:48
Jan 22, 2020, 21:48
 
I understand that they want to use financial means to deter sexist behaviour, and a high sum is required in order to give enough incentive to change for a company, but why charge "the company / business" at at all? The "company" didn't do anything wrong, it was the individuals working in that company right? So target them, and their wages with fines or whatever the appropriate punishment is. It was individuals who did sexist things, and individuals that covered it up, and individuals that allowed the behaviour to perpeptuate.

It kind of feels like a weird palm off to not recognise that individuals are behind it, and blame a large entity instead. Isn't a bit like trying to sue Hollywood for what Weinstein or Cosby did?

It's all a bit weird to me.

_________________________________________________
"Money doesn't exist in the 24th century, the acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity." - Jean-Luc Picard
22.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 18:24
Jivaro
 
22.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 18:24
Jan 22, 2020, 18:24
 Jivaro
 
Someone needs to get out of California more often. Just saying.

I don't know what to think about the state being the ones to jump in, I don't know enough about those kind of legal things. I will say that it appears to be a matter of basic math and common sense that 10 Mil, in this day and age, for that many people, and for those types of repeated behaviors by senior management is stupid low. Basic math and common sense don't always translate to the legal actions I would expect though. For all the money they make on LoL, 400 Mil seems more appropriate in my head though.
Avatar 55841
21.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 17:24
21.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 17:24
Jan 22, 2020, 17:24
 
mxmissile wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 15:47:
The only lesson that should be learned from all this BS is NEVER start or run your business in California. The socialists and SJWs running the failing economy and government (look at broken ass infrastructure if you dont believe me) are destroying way of life there.
What exactly do you think the definition of 'socialism' is? Because it's very apparent it's not related to the actual definition.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
20.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 16:56
20.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 16:56
Jan 22, 2020, 16:56
 
California's been practicing a failing business strategy for decades... It's still one of the top 10 economies in the world (if carved out as it's own country). I would think that means it's not as business unfriendly as some would be made lead to believe.
19.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 16:53
19.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 16:53
Jan 22, 2020, 16:53
 
jdreyer wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 16:23:
mxmissile wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 15:47:
The only lesson that should be learned from all this BS is NEVER start or run your business in California. The socialists and SJWs running the failing economy and government (look at broken ass infrastructure if you dont believe me) are destroying way of life there.
Misogyny good! California bad! Got it.

He probably has that laminated on his front door. And license plate.
18.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 16:23
18.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 16:23
Jan 22, 2020, 16:23
 
mxmissile wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 15:47:
The only lesson that should be learned from all this BS is NEVER start or run your business in California. The socialists and SJWs running the failing economy and government (look at broken ass infrastructure if you dont believe me) are destroying way of life there.
Misogyny good! California bad! Got it.
To prevent CV-19, avoid the Serious Seven: weddings, funerals, faith-based activities, bars, gyms, house gatherings and other small events.
Avatar 22024
17.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 15:58
Beamer
 
17.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 15:58
Jan 22, 2020, 15:58
 Beamer
 
mxmissile wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 15:47:
The only lesson that should be learned from all this BS is NEVER start or run your business in California. The socialists and SJWs running the failing economy and government (look at broken ass infrastructure if you dont believe me) are destroying way of life there.

Sure you aren't thinking Mississippi, or Alabama, or any of the negative-federal-contribution states?
And sorry that the CA government won't let you fondle and fart on your employees. How unreasonable!
16.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 15:47
16.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 15:47
Jan 22, 2020, 15:47
 
The only lesson that should be learned from all this BS is NEVER start or run your business in California. The socialists and SJWs running the failing economy and government (look at broken ass infrastructure if you dont believe me) are destroying way of life there.
15.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 14:49
15.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 14:49
Jan 22, 2020, 14:49
 
Something must be really wrong over there. There are plenty of these that go around all the time (from bigger and smaller companies) and I don't see the state step in.
14.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 14:48
14.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 14:48
Jan 22, 2020, 14:48
 
Primalchrome wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 14:11:
This has been a shitshow all along. Half assed apologies and excuses from the Riot Leadership along with winks and nods.....and nothing was actually done to correct or even control the core issue.

Glad to hear someone is revisiting this...

$400M has a way of getting your attention.
To prevent CV-19, avoid the Serious Seven: weddings, funerals, faith-based activities, bars, gyms, house gatherings and other small events.
Avatar 22024
13.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 14:11
13.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 14:11
Jan 22, 2020, 14:11
 
This has been a shitshow all along. Half assed apologies and excuses from the Riot Leadership along with winks and nods.....and nothing was actually done to correct or even control the core issue.

Glad to hear someone is revisiting this...
Avatar 56308
12.
 
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit
Jan 22, 2020, 13:22
Beamer
 
12.
Re: California Intervenes in Riot Games Gender Discrimination Suit Jan 22, 2020, 13:22
Jan 22, 2020, 13:22
 Beamer
 
jdreyer wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 13:11:
Beamer wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 10:58:
Tipsy McStagger wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 10:45:
I'd really like to know what was going on in this office without having to read case files.

Both male and female sources have described seeing unsolicited and unwelcome pictures of male genitalia from bosses or colleagues. One woman saw an e-mail thread about what it would be like to “penetrate her,” in which a colleague added that she’d be a good target to sleep with and not call again. Another said a colleague once informed her, apparently as a compliment, that she was on a list getting passed around by senior leaders detailing who they’d sleep with. Two former employees said they felt pressure to leave after making their concerns about gender discrimination known. One former male employee said that Riot’s “bro culture” is more pronounced behind closed doors, and hurts men too: One of Riot’s male senior leaders regularly grabbed his genitals, the source said, adding, “If he walked into a meeting with no women he’d just fart on someone’s face.”

I dunno, all that sounds pretty normal to me. You're telling me that's not typical in corporate offices across the USA?

Generally senior leadership farts in your general direction, not your face.
31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older