An Afghan-born former SF police officer who allegedly endured more than a year of racial slurs, and says he was fired for speaking up about it, has been awarded a $455,000 settlement from the city.

According to now-former SFPD officer Mohammad Habib, an Afghan-born officer who joined the force in early 2017, his nearly year-and-a-half on the force was marred by a stream of racist slurs from his colleagues. He says he spoke up, and was then fired in May 2018. According to a discrimination lawsuit he filed three months later, he was fired because he spoke up about the slurs.

There must have been some merit to those claims, because Mission Local reports that on Tuesday, the SF Board of Supervisors approved a $455,000 settlement for Habib that had been negotiated by City Attorney David Chiu.

“I feel vindicated,” Habib told Mission Local after the settlement was approved. According to that outlet, the nearly half a million dollars is the largest settlement approved for an SFPD office in 13 years,

Mission Local has a laundry list of the racist comments alleged to have been directed at Habin by his colleagues. One officer allegedly repeatedly called him a“sand n*****,” another is alleged to have said “You can leave your … RPGs and grenades at home.”  Habib said he also heard slurs from fellow officers against Blacks and LGBTQ+ people on a regular basis.

For their part, SFPD claimed Habib was fired because of misrepresentations on his job application.

There is also the odd additional footnote to this story that the SFPD claimed, when dismissing Habib, that he had claimed to be a CIA officer involved with killing Osama bin Laden. It’s unclear whether he made that claim to anyone beyond a woman he was dating or her family, and frankly, whether he ever actually even claimed that. But the allegation was obviously not considered significant enough to jeopardize the very sizable settlement Habib will now receive.

City Attorney spokesperson Jen Kwart simply told Mission Local that “We believe the proposed settlement is an appropriate resolution given the inherent costs of continued litigation.”

Related: United Airlines Flight Attendants Allege Racism on L.A. Dodgers Charter Flights [SFist]

Image: Google Street View

Two veteran flight attendants, both women of color, are suing United Airlines, saying they were demoted off of working L.A. Dodgers team charter flights because the airline prefers “white, young, thin women” for that assignment.

Apparently it’s a pretty prized assignment to be airline flight staff on charter flight duty for professional and NCAA sports teams. Charter flight staff get perks like bonuses for longer flights, premium accommodations, a higher per diem rate, and even tickets to games and team merchandise.

But two veteran United Airlines flight attendants are suing the airline, saying they were demoted from L.A. Dodgers team charter flights over their age, ethnicity, and appearance, according to the Bay Area News Group. The plaintiffs Darby Quezada (44) and Dawn Todd (50) filed their suit Wednesday in a Los Angeles County Superior Court, alleging racial discrimination and religious discrimination.  Quezada is Black, Mexican and Jewish, Todd is Black.

Both Quezada and Todd have been with United Airlines for more than 15 years.

“Major American corporations like United Airlines must understand that it is illegal to make staffing decisions based on an employee’s race and looks, even if it is meant to please major clients like the Los Angeles Dodgers,” their attorney Sam S. Yebri said in a statement. “United’s blatantly discriminatory staffing decisions allowed the cancer of racism and antisemitism to metastasize on the flights themselves.”

Quezada reportedly got the Dodgers charter flight gig in 2020, and Todd in 2022, after what they say were “extensive interviews.” Both were then demoted off that crew later in 2022, and replaced by attendants whom the two say did not even have to interview for the positions.

The lawsuit alleges that “When Todd and Quezada asked United why certain flight attendants were added to the ‘dedicated crew’ or ‘dedicated list’ without having to interview like they did, Todd and Quezada were told that these White flight attendants fit a ‘certain look’ that the Dodgers’ players liked.”

According to Business Insider’s writeup of the lawsuit the replacement flight attendants were "white, young, thin women who are predominately blond and blue-eyed."

For their part, a United Airlines spokesperson said in a statement that “United fosters an environment of inclusion and does not tolerate discrimination of any kind. We believe this lawsuit is without merit and intend to defend ourselves vigorously.”

The attendants are asking for unspecified damages and a jury trial. United was similarly sued in 2020 by attendants who said they were denied charger flight assignments based on their appearance. That suit was settled out of court.

Related: Another Racial and Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Filed Against Tesla [SFist]

Image: Emiel Molenaar via Unsplash

Two years after suing Twitter for gender discrimination, engineer Tina Huang is looking to renew her fight against the tech giant, this time coming at them with data regarding pay from her peers still working there. Bloomberg reports that Huang's been gathering data since her 2015 lawsuit, and now, she's hoping to use all of that to represent the reported 133 female engineers working at the company "in what would be the first group case of its kind in the Bay Area if certified."

It seems like much of her case centers on gender and pay equity, which has been a longstanding battle within the tech industry itself (not to mention within nearly all other industries as well). Google is dealing with a similar complaint still being investigated by the U.S. Department of Labor, which accused the search engine giant of "extreme systemic disparity in pay based on gender." Huang's case cites this case as an example, and her lawyer, Jason Lohr, said, "By using statistical samples to show how it takes women longer to be promoted or that there are fewer women being promoted, the lawsuit will focus on company policies that produce that outcome."

Huang first took on Twitter when she sued them in March 2015, alleging that she was passed over for a promotion because of her gender. She accused the company of favoring men over women in such promotions, as they use a "black box" (i.e., mysterious, inscrutable) promotion process, which makes understanding the whys and wherefores of promotions all but impossible. Huang wanted to know exactly why she was passed over, and informed the CEO about her concerns regarding the process' lack of transparency. Later, she was allegedly told by a colleague that her coding skills that were to blame, which she did not agree with. The HR department then allegedly told her to take some time off while they figured things out, but then she was placed on indefinite leave while her case was left "in limbo." When she returned to work at the request of HR, she was allegedly berated for taking leave, and she says she was ultimately let go for that. In court, Twitter said they never recommended she take time off in the first place. Huang told Bloomberg, "There was no intention of rectifying the situation. They didn’t really want me back in the office." It's unclear whether Twitter still uses that "black box" promotion process, but what is clear is that Huang still believes the company is guilty of "stacking the deck" against women.

Huang said her renewed interest in taking up the battle against Twitter stems from another high-profile case of gender discrimination and harassment: that of Susan Fowler, whose blog post detailing her experiences at Uber brought on a fresh volley of accusations from many other women working in the tech industry. Huang told Bloomberg, "You not only saw real action happen at Uber but you also saw the amount of the conversation. Women were emboldened by it." She's not wrong, either; Fowler's blog post brought on a veritable sea change, at least in the public eye, with Uber moving to course-correct its by-then reportedly "fratty" culture, ultimately resulting in the ousting of Travis Kalanick, former CEO and founder. Twitter has its own reputation for being a bit "fratty," as back in 2015, they threw a fraternity/Greek-themed party merely a few months after Huang launched her initial discrimination lawsuit. They acknowledged that it was in poor taste, but, as with many of Twitter's thus-far empty apologies, the damage had already been done.

Bloomberg says that Twitter has responded to Huang's previous accusations, saying that, "Twitter is deeply committed to a diverse and supportive workplace, and we believe the facts will show Ms. Huang was treated fairly."

Related: Google Employee Writes Internal Memo Railing Against Women, Diversity; Rage Ensues

Three more men have come forward alleging that they were the victims of racist verbal attacks and harassment on the factory floor of Tesla's Fremont plant, and they've filed a lawsuit in Alameda County court seeking unspecified damages. This suit follows on a similar case brought by former employee DeWitt Lambert in March which included a video that showed coworkers using racial epithets and lobbing apparent threats.

As the Mercury News first reported, the new suit is being brought by Lambert's same attorney, Lawrence Organ, on behalf of three former Tesla employees — father and son Owen and Demetric Diaz, and Lamar Patterson — all of whom say they were victims of discrimination and harassment. All three men are African American, and Organ says their cases "seem to show a pattern of insensitive behavior by Tesla supervisors and coworkers," and "That's a problem."

Owen Diaz, 49, went to work at the Tesla plant as an elevator operator in the summer of 2015, and he encouraged his then 19-year-old son to apply for a job there as well. Diaz says that he was regularly subject to racial epithets from coworkers that he tried to ignore, but that he later got into a heated argument with a supervisor who drew a racially charged "pickaninny" cartoon on a piece of cardboard. Diaz also says he witnessed his son being called an epithet by a different supervisor. "I was turning the corner, I was coming out to give my son his lunch, and his supervisor started calling him a [expletive] [n-word],” Diaz tells NBC Bay Area. He also says coworkers would say things like "Go back to Africa."

Below, a picture of the racist cartoon, which was allegedly drawn on the side of a bale of cardboard.

Diaz says that after he complained, he started to receive poor performance reviews, and he ultimately left work at the plant in May 2016.

Tesla suggests in a statement that the latest lawsuit, as well as a federal civil rights complaint brought by Organ on Lambert's behalf, are the work of an opportunistic lawyer seeking "a favorable forum" for a suit. The company also questions the validity of Owen Diaz's claims, saying that they received an emailed complaint from Diaz about a belligerent coworker in October 2015 that "made no mention of the use of any racist language or epithets." The company also questions why the former employees did not first bring their complaints to the state's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which would typically be the first step in a case like this.

Per NBC Bay Area, a spokesperson for the company also said, "We will never be able to stop every single person in the factory from engaging in inappropriate conduct, but we will continue to do everything that we can to encourage the right behavior and to take action whenever something bad happens."

In a different statement to Business Insider, the Tesla rep said, "In situations where Tesla is at fault, we will never seek to avoid responsibility. But in this instance, from what we know so far, this does not seem to be such a case."

Earlier this year, a female engineer at the company claimed that she was paid less than her male counterparts and discriminated against, claims that the company denied.

Last week, Tesla fired hundreds of workers — it's unclear how many but it was somewhere between 400 and 1200 — claiming the terminations were based on performance reviews, and that the company was continuing to grow. Some of those fired, however, say that the company appeared to cutting costs and conducting layoffs, as CNBC reports. According to one source, "Those terminated were generally the highest paid in their position," and they all came from Tesla's motors division — though it was earlier reported that most of these layoffs were in engineering and management and not at the factory level.

Related: The 'Affordable' Tesla Model 3 To Start Rolling Off The Lines Friday

On Wednesday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo rescinding workplace protections for transgender people.

BuzzFeed procured Sessions' memo reversing the Obama Administration policy, which reads, in part: "Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination encompasses discrimination between men and women but does not encompass discrimination based on gender identity per se, including transgender status." Following the issuance of this memo, the Justice Department now expects the rest of the federal court system to fall in line with their interpretation, going against the increasing number of federal court rulings that protect trans employees.

The protections were previously put in place through a memo issued by the Obama Justice Department. In that memo, originally obtained by the Washington Blade, then-Attorney General Eric Holder said that the protections offered by the Civil Rights Act extended to trans people, making discrimination on the basis of gender identity illegal. He wrote, "After considering the text of Title VII, the relevant Supreme Court case law interpreting the statute, and the developing jurisprudence in this area, I have determined that the best reading of Title VII’s prohibition of sex discrimination is that it encompasses discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status."

How to interpret Title VII has been an ongoing topic of debate for quite some time, though, with more progressive, liberal administrations often making attempts to interpret the Civil Rights Act's protections on the basis of sex to also mean that the government must offer protections on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation as well. One of the biggest fears going into this current administration was that the progress and protections established for the entire LGBTQ community over the past eight years (and longer) would vanish. With this news of Sessions' memo from Wednesday, those fears are coming true.

The administration's reversal of LGBTQ protections has been an ongoing one since Trump took office. Just last week, Slate reported that the Department of Justice filed an amicus brief arguing that Title VII also doesn't protect employees from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The brief read, in part: "Employers under Title VII are permitted to consider employees’ out-of-work sexual conduct. There is a common sense, intuitive difference between sex and sexual orientation." However, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission interprets Title VII's protection on the basis of sex to also mean employees are protected against anti-gay discrimination, as Slate pointed out in their report on the brief. It's been like that for over 15 years, spanning multiple administrations, and despite that fact, the current DOJ is moving to argue that they've all been incorrect interpretations.

Going further back, Towleroad reported back in March that Trump signed an order essentially allowing federal contractors to discriminate against LGBT workers. Trump's order rescinded another order set forth by Obama, which required federal contractors to prove that they're complying with 14 different federal laws. One of those laws protects employees based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Though Trump's order only applies to federal contractors, it was still a symbolic move — in rescinding it, Trump signaled to the rest of the world that enforcing such protections weren't a priority for this administration.

The Justice Department appears set on disregarding how the thinking around workplace protections has changed in the last decade. Sharon McGowan, a former lawyer with the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division spoke with BuzzFeed about Sessions' latest memo, saying, "The memo is devoid of discussion of the way case law has been developing in this area for the last few years. It demonstrates that this memo is not actually a reflection of the law as it is — it's a reflection of what the DOJ wishes the law were."

This move by the DoJ comes at a time when, according to the Transgender Law Center, laws regarding trans people are considered "low" or "negative" for over half the country, despite the trends in case law.

Sessions has made no secret of his disdain for progressive politics and civil rights groups. It came out back during his 1986 confirmation hearings for a federal judgeship, as the HuffPo reported last year, when one colleague said that Sessions referred to the ACLU and NAACP as "un-American" and said they "did more harm than good when they were trying to force civil rights down the throats of people who were trying to put problems behind them."

Related: Chelsea Manning, Nancy Pelosi And Others React To Proposed Trans Military Ban

For the first time, an Airbnb host who exhibited racism on the platform — an all too common occurrence — will be held legally responsible and penalized. Tami Barker, the owner of a home at Big Bear Lake in Southern California who canceled a booking with an Asian-American woman in February on the basis of her race, has been ordered by the state to pay $5,000 in damages, the Guardian reports.

The penalty is a historic one, after the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) reached an agreement with the company to test for racial bias in its users. The tests, in which investigators create fake accounts and request stays, apply to California hosts who have had complaints lodged against them and have at least three postings — about 6,000 hosts per the Guardian.

Bias in the case of Barker was cut-and-dried. The host abruptly canceled a reservation in February that 26-year-old Dyne Suh made for a cabin near Big Bear just minutes before Suh arrived, sending her a message saying "I wouldn’t rent to u if u were the last person on earth," and "One word says it all. Asian." Barker also cited Trump’s presidency as a defense of her discrimination. Suh proceeded to post screenshots of the exchange to Facebook, and was coincidentally put on camera to tell her story by a local TV station who happened to be in the area reporting on a snowstorm that was happening at the time.

After Barker’s cancellation, Suh and several friends were forced to look for another place to stay on a snowy night. The incident went viral in April after Suh's teary video from the news station appeared online. “I’ve been here since I was 3 years old,” Suh said in the video. “America is my home.”

After Suh reported the incident to both Airbnb and DFEH, as The Verge writes, Barker was permanently banned from the platform. The DFEH undertook their own investigation and mediated conversations between Suh and Barker’s lawyer.

Beyond the monetary penalty, Barker will have to take a college-level Asian American studies class, personally apologize to Suh, volunteer with a civil rights organization, attend a “public education event,” and comply with anti-discrimination laws, per the department’s announcement about the agreement. Behind the requirements is an effort to make sure bias is undermined, rather than simply penalized. “The law tends to be backwards-looking, focusing on compensating people for harm,” DFEH’s director Kevin Kish told the Guardian. “We’re interested in remedies that repair harm and transform relationships.”

Barker's lawyer issued a statement to the LA Times saying she was “regretful for her impetuous actions and comments” and “pleased to have resolved her claims with Miss Dyne Suh and the DFEH in a manner that can hopefully bring a positive outcome.”

Similar penalties may come in the future from DFEH, based on discrimination in Airbnb hosting made notorious with the hashtag #AirbnbWhileBlack. The Guardian reports that the agreement between Airbnb came after a ten-month investigation from DFEH concerning complaints that Airbnb hosts exhibited bias.

Research from Harvard Business School in 2015 found that Airbnb users with names that sound “distinctively African-American” were 16 percent more likely to be rejected for a listing than those with white-sounding names. Airbnb has condemned the discrimination exhibited by some of its hosts, but the platform also exists in a hazy legal area, as Fortune explains, where hosts may not be subject to the same anti-discrimination laws as local businesses — though this case in California may be a turning point. Recently, the company has made some changes, recommended after an investigation by former attorney general Eric Holder, such as shrinking the size of profile pictures and releasing a nondiscrimination policy in an effort to undercut bias.

Previously: Woman Refused Access To Airbnb House At California Ski Resort Because She Is Asian

Back in January, in the wake of a series of new laws in mostly Southern states that promote or condone discrimination against the LGBT community, a California law took effect banning the use of state funds for state employee or official travel to four states: Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Tennessee. As of this week, Attorney General Xavier Becerra announced that the list has now doubled and includes four more states that have enacted similar laws: Alabama, Kentucky, South Dakota and Texas. As the Mercury-News puts it, "California has its own travel ban."

Texas, South Dakota, and Alabama all enacted new laws allowing foster and adoption agencies to refuse to place children with same-sex couples for "faith-based" reasons. In Kentucky, a recently enacted law protecting "religious expression" in schools appears to permit LGBT discrimination in student organizations.

"Our country has made great strides in dismantling prejudicial laws that have deprived too many of our fellow Americans of their precious rights,” says Becerra in a press release. "Sadly, that is not the case in all parts of our nation, even in the 21st Century."

And in a news conference Thursday alongside reps from the ACLU, Becerra said, "We will not spend taxpayer dollars in states that discriminate."

The original CA law, AB 1887, came into being late last year following the much publicized and controversial North Carolina law regarding the use of gendered restrooms by transgender people — the passage of which led to multiple companies and organizations, including the NBA and the SF Symphony, canceling plans in the state. The North Carolina legislature repealed the law, known as HB2, in March of this year, but Republicans there insisted on provisions preventing future anti-discrimination measures.

As soon as HB2 passed in March 2016, SF Mayor Ed Lee banned all non-essential city-funded travel to North Carolina.

The California travel ban makes exceptions for trips needed to enforce California laws, tax auditors, and to fulfill contracts made before 2017, but travel to conferences and the like will be banned. And, interestingly, California's Board of Equalization keeps an office in Houston, as the Sacramento Bee points out.

The governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, immediately responded, via a spokesperson, saying, "California may be able to stop their state employees, but they can't stop all the businesses that are fleeing over taxation and regulation and relocating to Texas." Fox News was quick to pick up that comment.

Previously: In Wake Of Anti-LGBT Law Passage, Mayor Ed Lee Bans City-Funded Travel To North Carolina

The Union Square-area Forever 21 store in San Francisco is the target of a civil rights claim by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing after it came to light that management at the store was allegedly requiring all employees to speak English only during work hours — which is a violation of state law. As the Chronicle reports, three Spanish-speaking employees brought the claim after having their work hours reduced following complaints they made about the rule, which prevented them from speaking in Spanish with each other, or with customers who primarily spoke Spanish.

The agency is seeking damages on behalf of the employees for discriminating against them based on their national origin. Says Kevin Kish, the state agency’s director, "Linguistic diversity is a business reality in the California workplace, and the department will carefully scrutinize English-only rules to ensure that all employees are treated equally, regardless of their national origin."

The Forever 21 corporation, which is based in Los Angeles, denies that any of their stores has ever had an English-only policy, and said in a statement that the company is "committed to diversity and inclusion in all of our stores."

The store in question appears to be not the former Forever 21 at Powell, which closed two years ago, but the XXI Forever-branded store at Stockton and Market.

Tesla engineer AJ Vandermeyden says she's paid a lower salary than her male counterparts for her work at the luxury electric car company where she claims she's subjected to workplace harassment in an environment dominated by men. “Until somebody stands up, nothing is going to change,” Vandermeyden tells the Guardian, though she fears retaliation or recrimination for speaking out against the company where she's worked since 2013 and for filing a discrimination lawsuit against the automaker last year.

“I’m an advocate of Tesla," Vandermeyden, 33, told the Guardian in her first interview since filing the suit. "I really do believe they are doing great things. That said, I can’t turn a blind eye if there’s something fundamentally wrong going on.” Vandermeyden's complaint alleges that women, “equally or more qualified” than men, were denied promotions given to those men and that, generally speaking, men were better compensated by the company. “Equal pay is something that is essentially in the back of your mind every single day,” she said. “You have all these data points showing how you’ve exceeded some of the predecessors and improved on the system. It wears on you.”

The complaint also describes a culture of “unwelcome and pervasive harassment by men on the factory floor including but not limited to inappropriate language, whistling, and catcalls.” In one 2015 instance, male employees "started hooting and hollering and whistling" at her and another female employee. That can’t happen without somebody noticing … It’s disturbing.” Vandermeyden said, adding that she's even transferred out of her former post in general assembly to the purchasing department to avoid the alleged harassment.

Vandermeyden's allegations against Tesla precede those made by former Uber engineer Susan Fowler in a blog post, into which the ride-hailing company has launched an investigation with former attorney general Eric Holder involved. But at Tesla, by contrast, Vandermeyden's formal allegations have been dismissed or denied: A Tesla spokesperson told the guardian that a "neutral third party" review found her “claims of gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation have not been substantiated."

Tesla executives took a similar approach earlier last month when one factory worker, Jose Moran, called attention to what he described as dangerous and unfair labor conditions at the company's Fremont plant in a Medium post detailing work-relating injuries and decrying low pay, Moran proposed unionization, writing that he and others had discussed the matter and reached out to the United Auto Workers union for support.

But Tesla CEO Elon Musk disputed Moran's claims in an email to employees obtained by BuzzFeed that called the United Auto Worker's union's reasons for promoting unionization “disingenuous or outright false.” Musk also denied Moran's safety claim. “After looking into this claim, not only was it untrue for this individual’s team, it was untrue for any of the hundreds of teams in the factory,” the CEO wrote.

To rally the troops, Musk described Tesla's need to work together to succeed on the difficult road ahead. "The forces arrayed against us are many and incredibly powerful," he wrote, "This is David vs Goliath if David were six inches tall! Only by being smarter, faster and working well as a tightly integrated team do we have any chance of success."

So, as if in lieu of a union, Musk proposed perks and amenities that were just around the corner. These, which would appear with more frequency as the company became more profitable, would be "little things that come along like free frozen yogurt stands scattered around the factory and my personal favorite: a Tesla electric pod car roller coaster (with an optional loop the loop route, of course!) that will allow fast and fun travel throughout our Fremont campus, dipping in and out of the factory and connecting all the parking lots."

Who needs a union when you've got a roller coaster? Wheeeeeeeee!

Related: Instagram Account For Tesla Factory Parking Lot Shows Tesla Workers Probably Shouldn't Drive

In April 2016, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick announced that publisher and business mogul Arianna Huffington would join his company's board of directors, praising her "emotional intelligence," the kind women tend to have so much of. "I’m confident she will bring some ethos and pathos to our Uber logos," Kalanick said.

Let's hope so, at least on the "ethos" part, and now it looks like we'll get to see. As the ride-hailing company reckons with the account of a former female engineer, Susan Fowler, who alleges she was harassed, and then intimidated and stymied by HR, Huffington writes on Uber's blog that she'll be taking a leadership role investigating the situation.

On Sunday, Fowler wrote that in a tumultuous year at Uber, she was harassed by a possible repeat offender because, she was allegedly told, he was a "high performer." While he got a pass, and allegedly took advantage of it to harass more women, her mobility at the company was blocked. According to Fowler, the situation was such that a 25 percent female team was, in short order, just 3 percent female.

In response to the widely-circulated accusations, Kalanick penned a company-wide email and announced former Attorney General Eric Holder would participate in an investigation into the alleged HR turmoil. Now it's Huffington's turn to say her piece, and she claims she'll ensure the accountability of Uber's leadership, having spent more than 60 minutes speaking with the company's HR head.

I just joined Travis and Liane Hornsey, Uber’s recently hired Chief Human Resources Officer, for the company’s weekly meeting. We spent over an hour discussing women in the workplace — and talking about the review that’s underway by Eric Holder and Tammy Albarran into diversity and inclusion at Uber.

Travis spoke very honestly about the mistakes he’s made — and about how he wants to take the events of the last 48-hours to build a better Uber. It was great to see employees holding managers accountable. I also view it as my responsibility to hold the leadership team’s feet to the fire on this issue.

Change doesn’t usually happen without a catalyst. I hope that by taking the time to understand what’s gone wrong and fixing it we can not only make Uber better but also contribute to improvements for women across the industry.

This was Huffington's initial reaction to Fowler's account.

After joining Uber's board, last summer Huffington left her role as chairwoman, president, and editor-in-chief of the publication that bears her name to champion powerful, pressing causes.... such as getting a good night's sleep, the subject of her book The Sleep Revolution. She's also working on her company Thrive Global, a "corporate and consumer well-being and productivity platform."

As BuzzFeed tech writer Nitasha Tiku observed last year, Huffington has framed her arguments about sleep and fatigue as labor issues. But so far, she's exerted "little pressure on employers to improve working conditions beyond installing a nap room."

Huffington ought to be rested and ready to go in her accountability efforts at Uber, then.

Previously: Ex-Uber Engineer Says Company Is Full Of Sexual Harassment, Intimidation

In former Uber engineer Susan Fowler's widely-circulated blog post "Reflecting On One Very, Very Strange Year At Uber," what was "strange" was repeated alleged sexual harassment, and what was "very" was the company's alleged failure to address that harassment and instead to punish her for bringing it up. In short, Fowler details a horrorshow of systemic failure at Uber that made it a seemingly unfair and unsafe place to work as a woman. As a result, Fowler claims that at Uber, women site reliability engineers like her dropped from 25% to 3% of the work force.

In response, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick ordered an "urgent investigation" into the allegations, calling the behavior they described as "abhorrent [and] against everything we believe in" at Uber. According to New York Times tech reporter Mike Isaac, Kalanick also sent out an email to employees in which he says that Arianna Huffington, a board member of the company, would be at an "All-Hands Meeting" at Uber in San Francisco today. Huffington will review the investigation, Kalanick says, as will former Attorney General Eric Holder, who has worked with tech companies like Airbnb on their discrimination policies.

Recode also received the memo to employees, which is as follows:

Team,

It’s been a tough 24 hours. I know the company is hurting, and understand everyone has been waiting for more information on where things stand and what actions we are going to take.

First, Eric Holder, former US Attorney General under President Obama, and Tammy Albarran -- both partners at the leading law firm Covington & Burling-- will conduct an independent review into the specific issues relating to the work place environment raised by Susan Fowler, as well as diversity and inclusion at Uber more broadly. Joining them will be Arianna Huffington, who sits on Uber’s board, Liane Hornsey, our recently hired Chief Human Resources Officer, and Angela Padilla, our Associate General Counsel. I expect them to conduct this review in short order.

Second, Arianna is flying out to join me and Liane at our all hands meeting tomorrow to discuss what’s happened and next steps. Arianna and Liane will also be doing smaller group and one-on-one listening sessions to get your feedback directly.

Third, there have been many questions about the gender diversity of Uber’s technology teams. If you look across our engineering, product management, and scientist roles, 15.1% of employees are women and this has not changed substantively in the last year. As points of reference, Facebook is at 17%, Google at 18% and Twitter is at 10%. Liane and I will be working to publish a broader diversity report for the company in the coming months.

It is my number one priority that we come through this a better organization, where we live our values and fight for and support those who experience injustice.

Thanks,

Travis

In the past, Uber has declined to publish its diversity numbers, a practice adopted by much of its cohort of tech companies, so the company decision to do so is notable. Observers of Uber might also notice a trend in that, when Kalanick last faced internal and external pressure, to terminate a working relationship with President Trump, he did so, stepping down from his role on the President's Economic Advisory Council.

Related: Uber CEO To Step Down From Trump Advisory Council

A complaint filed by the Department of Labor claims that software giant Oracle, which employs 45,000 US workers, is engaged in a “systemic practice of paying Caucasian male workers more than their counterparts in the same job title,” unfairly under-compensating women, African-American and Asian employees. BuzzFeed reported on the complaint earlier today,which is online and claims that the department "found gross disparities even after controlling for job title, full-time status, exempt status, global career level, job specialty, estimated prior work experience, and company tenure."

Another portion of the complaint alleges that Oracle has a "pattern and practice of hiring discrimination against qualified White, Hispanic, and African American Applicants in favor of Asian Applicants, particularly Asian Indian, based on race in 69 job titles at its headquarters." One hypothesis from the complaint is that “targeted recruitment, and referral bonuses... encouraged its heavily Asian workforce to recruit other Asians."

As Oracle has contracts with the federal government worth hundreds of millions, it must prove that it meets certain national equal employment opportunity standards by providing necessary data. The Labor Department says in its complaint that Oracle “refused to produce” data relating to compensation, hiring, and more, “any material demonstrating whether or not it had performed an in-depth review of its compensation practices." Bloomberg explains that if Oracle doesn't change its practices, those contracts could be severed and Oracle cold be barred from seeking new ones.

A spokesperson for Oracle claimed the complaint was “politically motivated, based on false allegations, and wholly without merit," in a statement.

Perhaps Oracle will fare better under a new Department of Labor led by the Trump Administration. Last month, Oracle CEO Safra Catz joined the President-Elect's transition team, saying before a meeting with him that “I plan to tell the president-elect that we are with him and will help in any way we can.” That pledge prompted one Oracle senior staffer to resign publicly in protest and disgust.

Previously: Oracle Senior Staffer Resigns In Protest After CEO Joins Trump Transition Team, Invites Others To Join Petition

On the campaign trail, Donald Trump vowed to "drain the swamp" on Capitol Hill. Instead, he's made clear with his staff appointments so far that his intention is to pump it full of toxic sludge, nourishing the monsters and goblins who burble beneath its surface.

On Sunday, for example, Trump's transition team announced that former campaign chief executive and Breitbart Media Chairman Steve Bannon would serve as President Trump's chief strategist and senior council. Bannon, who dresses his racist and xenophobic rhetoric in the gauzy veil of "nationalism," will share power with Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus who was appointed Chief of Staff.

"It is a sad day when a man who presided over the premier website of the 'alt-right'—a loose-knit group of white nationalists and unabashed Anti-Semites and racists—is slated to be a senior staff member in 'the people's house,'" said Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt.

As if Bannon's record of bigotry and accusations of domestic violence and voter fraud weren't enough to truly terrify us, the Washington Post scoured his spooky radio interviews with Trump during the campaign. There are nine of those with a cumulative two hours of one-on-one babble, and they further illustrate Bannon's horrorshow belief system. To pluck one remark from the many that may hit home in Silicon Valley, here's Bannon on Asian people in technology:

“When two-thirds or three-quarters of the CEOs in Silicon Valley are from South Asia or from Asia, I think.. ” Bannon trailed off. “A country is more than an economy. We’re a civic society.”

For the record, The National Foundation for American Policy found in March that "51 percent, or 44 out of 87, of the country’s $1 billion startup companies had at least one immigrant founder."

WaPo observes that throughout the interviews for Breitbart News Daily on SiriusXM's Patriot radio, Bannon flatters and coaxes Trump, calling him "sir" and playing "bad cop" to Trump's "good." When Bannon made the above comment about Silicon Valley, he positioned his anti-immigrant stance as nearly absolute, which even Trump appeared to question.

“We have to be careful of that, Steve. You know, we have to keep our talented people in this country,” said Trump, having just mentioned Ivy League students. “I think you agree with that,” Trump asked Bannon. “Do you agree with that?”

Apparently not. Later, Trump added that “I still want people to come in... but I want them to go through the process.” Bannon's rejoinder: “You got to remember, we’re Breitbart. We’re the know-nothing vulgarians." Not anymore. You're the Chief Strategist for the President of the United States, sir.

Related: The Tech World Is Losing Its Collective S**t Over Trump's Win

An Uber driver is twice as likely to cancel a ride if the passenger requesting it has a black-sounding name, a new study from the National Bureau of Economic Research finds. The study, picked up by the Chronicle, focuses on close to 1,500 Lyft and Uber rides in Seattle and Boston and found that wait times for passengers with white-sounding names were also significantly shorter than those with black-sounding names.

"Results indicated a pattern of discrimination, which we observed in Seattle through longer waiting times for African American passengers—as much as a 35 percent increase," reads the abstract of the study, which was carried out by researches from Stanford, MIT, and the University of Washington. "In Boston, we observed discrimination by Uber drivers via more frequent cancellations against passengers when they used African American-sounding names."

While taxi drivers have long been accused of failing to stop for black passengers, it was hoped that ride-hail companies would help put an end to this particularly insidious form of discrimination. Just this past May, Chicago Sun-Times columnist Laura Washington wrote of her experiences as a black woman trying to hail cabs versus Uber. The article was titled "Uber solves my ‘hailing while black’ problem."

“A black man couldn’t get a cab for 80 years in Harlem, right?” the columnist's former student, Voltaire Xodus, says in the piece. “Uber and Lyft come out and here, it is an innovation that …not only does it shatter 80 years of racism, it puts money in the hands of people that will do the right thing in the communities.”

Maybe that is true in Chicago, but study authors say they found evidence to the contrary in Boston and Seattle. "Across all trips, the cancellation rate for African American sounding names was more than twice as frequent compared to white sounding names. Male passengers requesting a ride in low-density areas were more than three times as likely to have their trip canceled when they used a African American-sounding name than when they used a white-sounding name."

Interestingly, the study also found a troubling pattern of driver behavior when it came to female passengers. "We also find evidence that drivers took female passengers for longer, more expensive, rides in Boston."

The authors were quick to point out that the bias was being displayed by individual drivers, not the company as a whole, and yet that it is so widespread should ring alarm bells at both Uber and Lyft. “We believe Uber is helping reduce transportation inequities across the board, but studies like this one are helpful in thinking about how we can do even more,” Rachel Holt, head of North American operations for Uber, told the Chronicle.

While Uber tries to figure out how to respond, the study authors offer the following thought. "We observe that removing names from trip booking may alleviate the immediate problem but could introduce other pathways for unequal treatment of passengers."

Related: Uber Driver Accused Of Refusing To Drive Gay Couple During Pride

Nearly ten months after a Harvard Business School study revealed "widespread discrimination" against guests on the basis of race the short-term rental platform Airbnb, the San Francisco-based company is taking action, saying in a report released Thursday that all users will be required to to agree to a "community commitment" against discrimination based on "race, religion, national origin, disability, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation or age" as of November 1.

Issues regarding discrimination have plagued the platform for years, with reports of hosts canceling bookings on the basis of guests' orientation and race. The Harvard Business School study, which was published in December of 2015, looked at roughly 6,400 listings between the five cities, and found that if your name sounds "distinctively African-American," you are 16 percent less likely to be accepted as a guest.

According to the New York Times, Airbnb announced Thursday that they will "institute a new nondiscrimination policy that goes beyond what is outlined in several anti-discrimination laws" and "experiment with reducing the prominence of user photos, which have helped signal race and gender."

The company says they will also "accelerate the use of instant bookings, which lets renters book places immediately without host approval." (It's unclear, however, how instant booking use will prevent a racist host from canceling the reservation once they learn more about the guest, as has repeatedly happened in recent high-profile Airbnb discrimination cases.)

Thursday's 32-page discrimination report (you can read it in full here) was complied for Airbnb by Laura Murphy, a former director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Washington legislative office who began work for the rental company in June. But Murphy's new corporate allegiance didn't prevent her from critiquing the company, writing that “There have been too many unacceptable instances of people being discriminated against on the Airbnb platform because of who they are or what they look like.”

As a result of Murphy's findings, reports the Wall Street Journal, Airbnb will also "create a team of engineers, researchers and others devoted to fighting bias and offer sensitivity training to hosts."

They also "said it will guarantee customers lodging if they are found to have been discriminated against, though the specifics of that promise weren’t immediately clear." The company is also promising "new flagging tools so that people can quickly report discrimination or hate speech, which will be "expanded and enhanced by January 2017," TechCrunch reports.

In an email sent to guests and hosts this morning, Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky writes that “Discrimination is the opposite of belonging, and its existence on our platform jeopardizes this core mission... Bias and discrimination have no place on Airbnb, and we have zero tolerance for them."

"Unfortunately, we have been slow to address these problems, and for this I am sorry. I take responsibility for any pain or frustration this has caused members of our community. We will not only make this right; we will work to set an example that other companies can follow.”

Murphy's report follows work done by former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who joined the company in July, and penned their current nondiscrimination policy thereafter.

However, writes Murphy, "These changes are merely a first step."

“Airbnb understands that no one company can eliminate racism and discrimination. Fighting bias is an ongoing task that requires constant vigilance from all of us. And there is no question that we will continue to see examples of bias and discrimination in society, the sharing economy, and Airbnb in the future. As certain product tools are built and implemented, they will need to be refined and updated. The task of fighting discrimination is difficult, but Airbnb is committed to continuing this work in the future, and I will personally hold them to their word. We all should.”

Previously: Study Finds 'Widespread Discrimination' On Airbnb