Ellen Pao's attorney says she's not that different from the many men who've served as partners at the prominent Silicon Valley venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers: She has a background in science, an engineering degree from Princeton, and a business degree from Harvard.
And yet, says her attorney, Alan Exelrod, Kleiner didn't treat her like her male counterparts. "Kleiner Perkins used Ellen Pao's talents for six years," Exelrod said during the arguments in Pao's high-profile discrimination suit against her former employer. "When it came time to choose the next generation of leaders at Kleiner Perkins, Kleiner only chose men.”
The Pao-Kleiner trial, which kicked off in earnest today in San Francisco, promises to take an incisive look at the dark side of Silicon Valley’s work culture---a side characterized by systematic discrimination against women---and it could have far-reaching implications. If the jury finds in favor of Pao, it could help change the atmosphere across the American tech industry. But if the suit fails, the voices who claim Silicon Valley’s gender issues are overblown may only get louder.
Back in 2012, Pao, who was then a junior partner at KPCB, filed a lawsuit against the firm, claiming she was held back professionally and discriminated against because of the male-dominated culture at the company. Pao says a married colleague and fellow junior partner, Ajit Nazre, persuaded her into engaging in an affair with him, then retaliated against her after they broke up.
When she brought the issue to management, including informing her boss, John Doerr, a renowned investor and Ms. Pao’s boss and longtime mentor, Pao claims she was told not to complain, was treated unfairly, and got poor reviews, which eventually led to her dismissal.
In a trial brief, Kleiner Perkins has responded that Pao failed to advance at the firm because "she could not demonstrate the skills necessary for success as an investing venture capitalist." The firm claims that Pao had conflicts with her colleagues---both men and women---and frequently complained about them. She failed to win the trust of her partners, the company says, and this is the reason why she was asked to leave.
Pao’s counsel will have to have to prove two themes during the trial: that with other male colleagues at the firm, Pao did not have a level playing field at Kleiner Perkins; and that there was clear retaliation by the company after reporting the discrimination she faced to management. According to Pao, her firing in October 2012 was a direct result of these reports. But as Judge Harold Kahn noted to the courtroom during a briefing of her claims, Pao is not saying she was sexually harassed.
Exelrod says jurors will hear about how Pao was punished for ending her relationship with Nazre by being excluded from emails and meetings, how she received unwanted sexual advancements by others at the company, and how she was advised by management to drop her claims of sexism at the company. (One email by Nazre’s mentor presented in the courtroom read: "This will be put behind us as long as we don’t make a mountain out of a molehill. Believe me, I’m happy to be involved and work on worthwhile outcomes.")
Pao’s performance reviews often criticized how she was difficult to work with, according to Exelrod, while her male coworkers received milder admonishments for things like being “blunt or overbearing” or “too arrogant. Needs to tone it down a little.” And, Exelrod says, the jury will hear from damages experts talking about the difference between what she would have earned if she had been promoted, versus being dismissed.
At one point, early on in the situation, Doerr vetoed a proposal to terminate Pao. But Exelrod says that the company at large did not address her complaints. According to Exelrod, there’s ample proof that Kleiner Perkins systematically puts women down: In 2005, one woman was hired as senior partner. Another woman had been promoted from junior partner to senior partner. But none of the managing partners at the firm were female.
