Uber's search for a female CEO has been narrowed down to 3 men

SFGate ^ | August 4, 2017 | Elizabeth Dwoskin and Craig Timberg

[aquila48]

A company trying to recover from allegations of rampant sexism might reasonably think that hiring a female chief executive would help it restore credibility with customers and - perhaps more importantly - with potential employees in a tight marketplace for talent. But what if no women wanted the job?

That looks to be the case for Uber, the troubled ride-hailing company trying to replace deposed chief executive Travis Kalanick after a reign defined by highflying growth and a toxic brand of corporate machismo. In the wake of Kalanick's departure, a number of A-list female executives have made it clear they are not interested in the role.

Indeed, after a nationwide search that involved copiously combing through binders full of women across corporate America, the company has come up short. There are no women left on its current shortlist, which is down to three CEO candidates, according to people familiar with the search who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the matter freely.

Facebook's chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, was a top pick for the board, but she didn't want the job. Neither did Susan Wojcicki, chief of Google-owned YouTube. General Motors chief executive Mary Barra and EasyJet CEO Carolyn McCall, were reportedly approached, but did not pan out. Last week, HP chief executive Meg Whitman prominently took herself out of the running with a post on Twitter.

"Normally I do not comment on rumors," she tweeted, "but the speculation about my future and Uber has become a distraction."

[jimfree]

I probably have an unpopular view here, but I would take a woman over a man if they are considered equally qualified. It has nothing to do with diversity. Society does discount woman’s leadership a little bit because there aren’t too many of them. If a woman is considered as good a leader as another man based purely on merit, she probably is better than him.

Okay, fine. I'm there. In some such searches the phrase "equally qualified" gets beaten into submission rather than used as an honest guide. I have worked for women for over 40 years and have been blessed that most were highly competent. There are a couple that I would follow anywhere on any project.

[kearnyirish2]

I have been blessed to work both with and for some very talented, competent women. I’ve also worked with many more women who have no interest in working a minute more than the bare minimum, who will go to any lengths to avoid additional responsibilities, and who to the last one think they are worth 3X what they are getting paid. They are lucky to even have jobs.

When our company went on a window-dressing campaign to put women in higher positions (regardless of ability), probably to fend off future lawsuits, most of the men started “working like girls” - coming in just on time, leaving at 5 on the nose, taking full lunches, and no longer working from home. It was a real “quality of life” boost, and helped clarify why there is a “pay gap”. It isn’t a gap in hourly pay - it is a gap in work performed.

[kearnyirish2]

Or Asian. I’m not surprised; I’m sure many female candidates dropped out when they realized they may have to attend meetings after 4:30 pm...

[hal ogen]

Do any of the 3 men identify as a woman? Problem solved .

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

The first one to announce his transition to a female will get the job...

I see MagnoliaB reminded you that any one can read every post that you have made in your short time here on FR, a conservative news site. I read each of your posts. Each are appropriate for the Democratic Underground democraticunderground.com or Michael Moore, michaelmoore.com than for FR.

Perhaps it is time for you to go to the forum where your anti-Trump comments would be appreciated. I think my cat and or Barry Sortelo is more conservative than the person posting the comments that are allegedly yours.

Maybe time for you to announce your transition to a full-blown DU type...