"A jury rejected Ellen Pao's claims of gender discrimination by Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, in a case that riveted Silicon Valley for weeks and exposed how women fare in a male-dominated world of venture capital." - Peter Blumberg, Bloomberg, March 27, 2015. Here is the coverage.
This is no surprise. As defendant Kleiner began to present its case, there were downright contradictions in what Ellen Pao had contended. For example, she described a plane trip as dominated by frat-boy talk. Those on the flight stated that never happened.
But the major blow to her claims was the testimony of a Kleiner partner that she didn't have the instincts or skills to be a venture capitalist. In deliberating, the jury had asked to review that partner's testimony again. He noted that she lacked the genetic makeup to be an investor. She was not promoted. Eventually she was fired.
However, the lawsuit brought to global attention gender issues in Silicon Valley. Since that suit was filed, there have been two other recent ones. Tina Huang's was against Twitter and Chia Hong's against Facebook. Here is the coverage on my communications blog.
Huang's objective is to hers certified as a class action. That could be a shrewd move. One of the central problems with Pao's suit was that since it was individual, not class action, it opened her to attacks from the defense team on her character. She stood alone, a bad place to be in a gender suit.
The jurors are still deliberating on the retaliation claims. Here is coverage from Silicon Valley Business Journal.
Given that the fourth count is still being deliberated, reports Colleen Taylor in TechCrunch, "This means there has been no official verdict just yet, thought it is most likely that the rulings on the first three of the four claims will stand." Here you can read the article.
Jurors ruled 9 to 3 against Pao on the count of retaliation. Here is the coverage by The Wall Street Journal.