WotC Kotaku reports that "Wizards Of The Coast Deadnamed Trans Employees In Front Of Their Colleagues During Union Election, Apologized, Then Did It Again"

[jdrakeh]

So you have never worked for a midsize to large company then?

I worked for this USPS. Their HR department was an absolute nightmare.

 

[Ancalagon]

I understand why you have your disdain... I just wonder why you keep hanging around places involving WotC to maintain your disdain rather than just moving on with your life and go to places where you no longer have to deal with them.

Because they love DnD, and WotC makes DnD? Did you actually wonder, or was that just some phrasing?

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Same issue that folks who change names due to marriage or no longer married have to deal with. Most organizations do not have "One Master List" that all divisions use. Instead each division has its own list, often pulled from a HR or Payroll list, but not always updated until someone points out an error. Often, that division only updates its own list and doesn't communicate the error back to the other divisions. The result is that even if a name error is corrected in one place, it remains an error in other places.

Most likely nothing despicable here, just a bureaucracy being a bureaucracy.

And often when the two names conflict in two different places, half the time the correct name is switched back to the previous name when the two systems come into contact.

 

[Mannahnin]

I can hardly imagine working in HR for a company like Wizards and being this clueless.

The first error is somewhat understandable, but doing it again so soon seems egregious.

So you have never worked for a midsize to large company then?

Several. I wasn't referring to size with "like Wizards".

I’m afraid I can. As a Jet Propulsion Laboratories, Dad dealt with both NASA and Caltech bureaucracies. I seen some stuff.

JPL, NASA, and Caltech being known for employing a relatively high percentage of queer and trans folks, in your dad's time?

 

[AlViking]

The first error is somewhat understandable, but doing it again so soon seems egregious.


Several. I wasn't referring to size with "like Wizards".


JPL, NASA, and Caltech being known for employing a relatively high percentage of queer and trans folks, in your dad's time?

We aren't talking about a party invitation, it's a legal document and as far as we know they are required by law or by corporate policy to use the person's legal name. I can't really say what I think about how difficult it is for trans people to legally change their name in the US without running afoul forum policy but that is not WOTC's fault.

If there were any signs at all of WOTC being openly biased it would be a story. There are many possible reasons this happened, none of the likely reasons reflect overall WOTC policies or bias.

 

[VashVet]

I don’t think people have a clue what advocacy entails sometimes.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Because they love DnD, and WotC makes DnD? Did you actually wonder, or was that just some phrasing?

If the actions of the company matters that much to you that makes the thing you love... at some point you probably should just let the thing go. Because what are you waiting for? For the company to suddenly "turn good" and thus make you feel good for sticking with the product they make?

If you don't like the way a company acts and that matters to you... then stop transacting with the company. Otherwise there should be no question why a person's complaints will be defended against or why someone would question them and their motivations.

 

[Mannahnin]

We aren't talking about a party invitation, it's a legal document and as far as we know they are required by law or by corporate policy to use the person's legal name.

However, when the time came to actually vote, those employees found that the list given to the NLRB was the same one that WotC had used previously, deadnames and all. The article, at this point, confirms that "Union elections with the NLRB do not require use of legal names nor showing of ID—they just require employees confirming they are the same person that is on the list the NLRB is given." In contrast to this, when WotC sent around an apology email (included in the article), they stated that "The use of those legal names versus preferred names was part of a legal process." No explanation is given as to exactly what legal process this was a part of.

"For all we know"?

If they are required by law or policy, WotC could have cited the law or policy, which would be a pretty good defense to the appearance of incompetence or bigotry. Again, this speaks to competence or lack thereof on the part of the HR, Communications, and Executive staff involved.

 

[AlViking]

"For all we know"?

If they are required by law or policy, WotC could have cited the law or policy, which would be a pretty good defense to the appearance of incompetence or bigotry. Again, this speaks to competence or lack thereof on the part of the HR, Communications, and Executive staff involved.

Could also be system limitations, someone didn't get a memo, an a-hole that ran the report defied instructions. There is no other indication of bias, no ongoing reports of trans people being shamed or otherwise being treated differently at WOTC. All infinitely more likely than they're secretly snickering about their "gotcha". Bigots are not that subtle.

 

[Willie the Duck]

The first error is somewhat understandable, but doing it again so soon seems egregious.

Honestly, working in a large corporation, that's the one part that seems very explainable and at least somewhat understandable. Getting all address and contact info (of which lists like this often come from) updated is a genuine challenge for institutional data teams. Doing an update in information stream X and discovering that it isn't reflected in information stream Y is a constant issue.