Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> Wed, 25 May 2016 22:29 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=19537eb73b=jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE0E12D7EC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 15:29:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A7ZVewVvOItq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 15:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.consulintel.com (mail.consulintel.com [213.0.69.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 573E912D612 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 15:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-MDAV-Processed: mail.consulintel.com, Thu, 26 May 2016 00:29:21 +0200
Received: from [10.10.10.99] by mail.consulintel.com (MDaemon PRO v11.0.3) with ESMTP id md50000549050.msg for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 May 2016 00:29:20 +0200
X-Spam-Processed: mail.consulintel.com, Thu, 26 May 2016 00:29:20 +0200 (not processed: spam filter heuristic analysis disabled)
X-MDOP-RefID: re=0.000,fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0)
X-Return-Path: prvs=19537eb73b=jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: ietf@ietf.org
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.16.0.160506
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 00:29:17 +0200
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
To: <ietf@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <EE9DC85F-E902-4C4D-B901-4496C26D2B49@consulintel.es>
Thread-Topic: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
References: <D3662363.190A96%jon.peterson@neustar.biz> <CABcZeBMPAFdLwZTr7TCJC-tZ+X=CKGzQ7Jp0zqDO86PdPn6YvQ@mail.gmail.com> <8D82EA4F-1275-436C-8030-1E799F5D7F59@consulintel.es> <CABcZeBOCtk6JK_3w2_L87oyze+dfgy7fFyU7QrGmGgEtta1oZA@mail.gmail.com> <1CA535AB-CAC4-49CB-B094-AAA7FE3119FB@consulintel.es> <2b01eb8f-d319-7d20-0f84-9a774f9e0e44@nostrum.com> <C01AE269-3168-4B6A-B8D8-D97230288302@gmail.com> <8161273d-97c2-2757-5f0c-6146d0b297aa@nostrum.com> <E51DA1A2-AB3E-42F7-BC0A-308BE6B58580@gmail.com> <2270ea7c-cd6d-c3d5-e768-6d1f0ae15605@nostrum.com> <216D2B11-5E07-4DBE-BCC4-0A8ABCCB15B7@gmail.com> <cf9ad015-ef7d-6e11-44e8-6a0fb5a78b91@gmail.com> <EBBFC64A-C730-47D8-8F66-E4C7773A0344@gmail.com> <D5E06CF1-9C2D-41BE-8635-1F73321986EC@consulintel.es> <CAG4d1rfvYrW5TDCzdUoFeeQFnsDejWFn7jH+20xnJ4QHEsJ=2g@mail.gmail.com> <F2144741-4441-4F6E-B91E-6AEB52BCA7CF@consulintel.es> <CAG4d1rdC2SBC6F4-8MJGsJBt7kbJ+kRA5MKC5ZVUyhjCUJLkCg@mail.gmail.com> <72db82ac-e272-f269-f15e-0bcde9a1582e@gmail.com> <D3416945-1079-4994-B55C-2AD7913842B6@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <D3416945-1079-4994-B55C-2AD7913842B6@iii.ca>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/OZ91IO2pt8QTj3IPavzNq3NVQeA>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 22:29:25 -0000

That was not the point. Let me explain again:

Your work requires you go to a given place for a business meeting. That place will not allow you to go with your family because sexual discrimination. You can’t refuse to go to that place because you only want to go there if you can bring your family.

You still can go there and fulfil your job according to the work laws in your country, even if you don't bring your family. Right?

Saludos,
Jordi


-----Mensaje original-----
De: ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Responder a: <fluffy@iii.ca>
Fecha: miércoles, 25 de mayo de 2016, 22:56
Para: <ietf@ietf.org>
Asunto: Re: [Recentattendees] IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

>
>> On May 24, 2016, at 7:14 PM, Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On 5/24/16 2:20 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>>> I said this already a few messages ago. If instead of the IETF is a
>>> business meeting that your boss tell you need to go (at least in my
>>> country, and here comes what you said about different cultures), you
>>> will have no choice: a) Go there b) You’re fired, maybe unless a
>>> colleague can make it for you and your boss accept it But
>>> definitively, you will not be able to argue in front of a court to
>>> defend your job that you can’t go there because your family need to
>>> go there with you and that country don’t allow it.
>> 
>> Allow me to suggest that you know no such thing, and that
>> you're presenting a strawman argument that may, in fact,
>> be completely false.  US companies tend to come down on the
>> side of supporting diversity and rejecting bigotry - take
>> a look at the response to North Carolina's HB2.
>
>My employer has in their code of business conduct strong support for exactly what Melinda is saying. I do not believe anyone at my employer would be fired for being unwilling to put themselves in a position of sexual discrimination. My experience is that most large international companies have similar policies. 
>
>> 
>> It's fine to make conjectures, but please couch it in
>> terms of "I think this is what would happen."  I believe
>> that in this case you'd be incorrect.
>> 
>> Melinda
>> 
>
>