Posted on 06/13/2025 4:23:56 AM PDT by MtnClimber
The company allegedly required managers to reward employees “on the basis of their skin color alone and contrary to documented performance.”
Many believe that masculine industries, such as military and defense, are naturally immune to left-wing race and gender ideologies. This is mostly a myth. These institutions are organized according to prestige and profit—and when those signals point to “woke,” industry leaders have dutifully followed.
Take America’s largest defense contractor, Lockheed Martin. As we have previously reported, after the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, Lockheed adopted radical DEI policies and, in one instance, required white men in leadership positions to attend a racial reeducation program and atone for their “white male privilege.”
Now, a whistleblower has come forward to claim that Lockheed executives were so committed to DEI policies that they awarded some year-end bonuses based on employees’ skin color, rather than performance—in open violation of civil rights law.
The story began in December 2022, when the whistleblower was preparing recommendations for the aeronautics division’s year-end bonuses. The whistleblower was proud of the work the team had done to calculate awards. But soon after the bonuses were submitted for approval, higher-ups told the whistleblower that there was a problem: the “Comp Adder” list, which named recipients of bonus compensation, had too many white employees on it.
Santiago Bulnes, a vice president who now leads engineering on Lockheed’s F-35 program, wrote an email to the whistleblower. “I got a call from [human resources director] La Wanda [Moorer] last night regarding diversity stats on comp adder,” Bulnes, who did not respond to a request for comment, said. “They took a run at getting your few approved and we’re told that we need to fit in the box. I asked her to send you the list of diversity names to simplify the task of finding the best in the group.”
Next, our source claims, officials in Lockheed’s human resources department made the demand explicit. One communication instructed the whistleblower to add more than a dozen minorities to the list and recommended removing an equal number of “non-minority” employees. The implication was clear—“increasing POC for Comp Adder will result in removing equal count of non-minority”—and the instructions were deliberate, recommending specific race swaps by manager. For example, for one team, human resources officials instructed the whistleblower to “increase POC 4 and decrease non-minority 4.”
Our source was outraged. The company was requiring managers to reward employees “on the basis of their skin color alone and contrary to documented performance.” The whistleblower tried to protest this decision and filed an ethics complaint, arguing that the policy was unethical and could expose the company to legal liability, but management insisted. “Our HR counsel told me that while this may present business risk, it was the ‘less[e]r of two evils.’”
One driving force behind Lockheed’s discriminatory policy, according to our source, was La Wanda Moorer, the director of human resources. When the whistleblower asked Moorer, who did not respond to a request for comment, what would happen if the team could not find enough minorities to replace white workers on the bonus list, Moorer responded forcefully. “[T]he preference is for you to get there,” Moorer wrote. “If you are coming back and saying you can’t get there and it’s unnatural than [sic] I think that changes the conversation as a business area what risk are we willing to assume, and should we get into a situation where there is legal activity that takes place then you will be part of that process . . . . We haven’t ever been in a situation where we haven’t gotten there.”
Moorer’s last comment is worth highlighting. It suggests this wasn’t the first time Lockheed had engaged in a secret, post hoc process to strip bonuses from top performers and instead award them to employees who checked diversity boxes. And in the preceding sentence, Moorer seems to acknowledge that such policies, which are inherently discriminatory, could violate the law. Apparently, the company’s commitment to “diversity” trumped any other consideration.
In the end, the whistleblower followed the order and “swapped” 18 whites for 18 minorities, solely on the basis of race. A few months later, our source left the firm and penned a resignation letter to colleagues.
“I, at the direction of Lockheed, have actively discriminated against higher performing individuals, denied them higher pay they earned, denied them the opportunity to be motivated as a top performer,” the letter read. “Not only does this force a violation of my conscience that forces me to leave, but we could have 18 valid individual claims with associated public embarrassment and lost customer trust.”
A Lockheed spokesperson responded to our request for comment, insisting that “Lockheed Martin is a meritocracy” and is “committed to recognizing performance, rewarding excellence, and upholding the principles of merit and fairness.” The spokesperson claimed that our reporting “raise[s] concerns that we are taking seriously and investigating.”
Nevertheless, a reckoning may be coming. Earlier this year, President Trump signed an executive order prohibiting federal contractors from maintaining discriminatory DEI programs. His administration has signaled interest in prosecuting cases of anti-white discrimination. Though Lockheed quickly shuttered its DEI initiatives after Trump’s executive order, its actions earlier in the post-George Floyd era cannot be erased. As the whistleblower warned, racial discrimination is illegal—and the company could pay a heavy price.
One hopes that it will. For decades, companies could deliberately discriminate against white men without consequence. But that calculus is changing. The Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, now led by conservative super-lawyer Harmeet Dhillon, has sought to return the civil rights regime to its original mission: to enforce the law equally for individuals of all racial groups.
Dhillon might initiate this policy with a high-profile target—perhaps the nation’s largest defense contractor.
Lockheed Martin is an extension of government. Such korporate extension of government is right out of the definition of Fascism.
It was going on for decades when I worked there. Thankfully retired 14 years ago.
Btt
Its a company based in the Capital, whose deals are all made in “the swamp,” whose employees live in the swamp, all getting paid via US Govt spending / debt
We should expect no less.
Black women are the political commissars of the neo-marxist revolution.
“Lockheed Martin is an extension of government. Such korporate extension of government is right out of the definition of Fascism.”
Absolutely... Through the Corporate fascism of Vanguard and BlackRock. “Corporatism” is not Capitalism, it is fascism.
Capitalism vs Corporatism
“Capitalism is a social and economic system which recognizes individual rights, including the right to own properties and the possession of goods for the individual’s personal consumption. Corporatism, on the other hand, is a form of economy that was created as an option to socialism and intends to achieve social justice and equality without the need to take away private property from individual members of society. It stresses the positive role that government has in ensuring social justice while restraining social unrest as people look after their self-interests.”
Corporatism:
the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/corporatism
Capitalism:
“an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market”
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism
It is ignorant to even think these megacorporations are anything close to capitalists.
I worked in aviation for over 30 years.
Had a black female as a supervisor once when I was in the quality department.
My office was all (8) white boys and she knew WE knew she was way over her head....at one point she didn’t show up for a few days and then the story leaked ......turns out she was had been using her company issued credit card for several substantial purchases.
Suspended for a week without pay, came back to work and after that it was like it never happened.....can ya beat it? 🤷
DEI has imploded at lightening speed.....BECAUSE IT WAS CLEARLY ILLEGAL.
Let the lawsuits begin.
I may have to dump my LMT stock.
The promotion of unqualified women over well qualified men has been a problem at Lockheed for decades.
Exec’s oriented towards profit, as they shold be since they take an oath, frequently behave like abject cowards when some woketard out of HR prattles on getting public acceptance.
I ran into the same issue when rewarding a contract in AT&T. The “affirmative action” group (I.e., DEI by any other name) called me in for a “discussion” when I was not going to “correctly evaluate” a minority vendor so that they would get the contract. I told them that our mutual boss (a Veep) made it quite clear that rewards be on merit. They were not happy but knew that if they pushed any further I’d simply go to the Veep and ask if his mandates applied.
Can't wait to hear about those originally selected for a bonus finally receive them.
The headquarters of Lockheed Martin is in Bethesda, Maryland.
I do not really need to explain more than that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.