Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
241–250 of 423 posts
Re: Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No company is going to fire you because you were trying to help. This absolutely happens. As an example: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/man-fired-stop-kidnapping/ "You were employed by The Home Depot until June 19, 2017 when you were fired because you assisted the police in preventing a kidnapping."
Being told not to physically intervene in a dangerous situation and then being fired when you disobey company policy is unsurprising. Filling out a form to request another team review an account is entirely different. No one is physically interacting, and the company clearly has a sanctioned happy path for this request.
> according to Reagan, he was at work on 12 May 2017 when a co-worker told him he saw a man attack a woman in the parking lot. Reagan said he heard the woman scream: "Somebody help me, he's kidnapping my kid, he's stealing my kid!" Reagan told us he then contacted police, who instructed him to follow the man as he left the store area: "They said, don't touch him, don't engage with him, but keep an eye on him. Let us know where he is going so we know where to go when we get there."
> Reagan said that after returning to the store he was scolded by a supervisor and was fired four weeks later.
Physical intervention didn't occur.
Re: Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
#243The only problem being I refuse to work. Was hyping to post sexy pictures of myself to maybe get a girlfriend but that didn't happen.
Re: Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
My employment contracts have all required at minimum that I inform them of any commercial work I am doing outside my employment for them, and sometimes required that I get approval from them before beginning. Having some undisclosed second employment would definitely be grounds for firing, if they wanted.
OK sure, but is it illegal?
Re: Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
#245This is commercial bribery in most places. >California Code, Penal Code - PEN § 641.3 >(a) Any employee who solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept money or any thing of value from a person other than his or her employer, other than in trust for the employer, corruptly and without the knowledge or consent of the employer, in return for using or agreeing to use his or her position for the benefit of that other person,…
Re: Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like to imagine how insanely good Google’s customer service would be if no company including them captured more than 5-10% of market share.
Yep, it feels like them being a monopoly effectively kills every incentive for them to try harder. It's reminiscent of bureaucracy in third world countries where you will not get your passport issued or renewed until you grease enough palms of the right people who feel entitled to a certain level of corruption for their respective role.
Re: Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
#247Re: Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
#248This is commercial bribery in most places. >California Code, Penal Code - PEN § 641.3 >(a) Any employee who solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept money or any thing of value from a person other than his or her employer, other than in trust for the employer, corruptly and without the knowledge or consent of the employer, in return for using or agreeing to use his or her position for the benefit of that other person,…
Weird, so wait, are campaign donations capped at $250?
Re: Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
#249Re: Show HN: Pls Fix – Hire big tech employees to appeal account suspensions
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. It's based on accepting personal payment to spend company time and resources doing something other than what the employer wants. Sounds like low-key bribery to me. I imagine they're aware of this. The FAQ section states that employees are kept anonymous, but also says they verify if it's really a Google employee by sending an email to their google.com email address, which Google can of course see.
> to spend company time and resources doing something other than what the employer wants If you're salary, then that doesn't enter into the equation.