Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

secure.dahladmin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 68 posts

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#11

Post by googlerejection »

jedmeyers wrote: post #6
howawaygoog wrote: post #2

just got email for this, I did interview for Google and I'm over 40, (wonder how they got my info). I passed the interview but was shut down at the committee, very much doubt that age was a factor.

I've read that being rejected at a committee level happens relatively infrequent. Did they hint to what might be the reason for rejection at such a late stage?

I applied for an SWE position @ Google back in 2015.

I was also rejected at the committee level, the reason was that I didn't have the amount of domain knowledge they wanted; in my case it was estimation theory/signal processing.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#12

Post by ryandrake »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #4
howawaygoog wrote: post #2

just got email for this, I did interview for Google and I'm over 40, (wonder how they got my info). I passed the interview but was shut down at the committee, very much doubt that age was a factor.

Always an interesting choice, the upside if you join is you get some money if the suit is settled, I presume the only downside is that you pretty much won't ever be employed there ever if they have paid out a legal settlement check to you. (It turns out it isn't illegal not to hire based on previously being sued by someone). I doubt they would be forced to hire you if they settle. (which would be a huge downside in m…

At no point in the future will you be any younger. So if you think you are not being hired because they are discriminating based on age, then there is no downside to participating in the settlement--you won't be hired either way. If you think there is a chance you will be hired in the future, then they are not discriminating based on age.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#13

Post by sgift »

ryandrake wrote: post #12
ChuckMcM wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Always an interesting choice, the upside if you join is you get some money if the suit is settled, I presume the only downside is that you pretty much won't ever be employed there ever if they have paid out a legal settlement check to you. (It turns out it isn't illegal not to hire based on previously being sued by someone). I doubt they would be forced to hire you if they settle. (which would be a huge downside in m…

At no point in the future will you be any younger. So if you think you are not being hired because they are discriminating based on age, then there is no downside to participating in the settlement--you won't be hired either way. If you think there is a chance you will be hired in the future, then they are not discriminating based on age.

This assumes that the age discrimination is an absolute criteria (over age x? Out) and not one of several factors (e.g. a tie breaker if you have multiple broadly similar applicants).

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#15

Post by codeddesign »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #4
howawaygoog wrote: post #2

just got email for this, I did interview for Google and I'm over 40, (wonder how they got my info). I passed the interview but was shut down at the committee, very much doubt that age was a factor.

Always an interesting choice, the upside if you join is you get some money if the suit is settled, I presume the only downside is that you pretty much won't ever be employed there ever if they have paid out a legal settlement check to you. (It turns out it isn't illegal not to hire based on previously being sued by someone). I doubt they would be forced to hire you if they settle. (which would be a huge downside in m…

But here lies the problem..suing simply for the sake of suing. He clearly stated that he did feel that he was discriminated nor did he make it apparent that his life was dramatically altered from him not getting the job. And yet, you encourage him to sue anyways purely for the sake that he may get a little cash.

There are legitimate lawsuits in which people's lives have been dramatically affected, and then there are the plethora of scum cases in which people are looking for quick cash. People say that Trump will take American down..no, it's people's unethical mindset that they feel they can take advantage of our basic right to sue for compensation when an aggresses circumstance has occurred.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#16

Post by cjhopman »

vemv wrote: post #14

Why would to want to work for an organsisation that (supposedly) discriminates against you anyway?

Why would you want to eat at a restaurant that discriminates against you anyway? Why would you want to go to a school that discriminates against you anyway? Why would you want to ride a bus that discriminates against you anyway?

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#17

Post by cjhopman »

codeddesign wrote: post #15
ChuckMcM wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Always an interesting choice, the upside if you join is you get some money if the suit is settled, I presume the only downside is that you pretty much won't ever be employed there ever if they have paid out a legal settlement check to you. (It turns out it isn't illegal not to hire based on previously being sued by someone). I doubt they would be forced to hire you if they settle. (which would be a huge downside in m…

But here lies the problem..suing simply for the sake of suing. He clearly stated that he did feel that he was discriminated nor did he make it apparent that his life was dramatically altered from him not getting the job. And yet, you encourage him to sue anyways purely for the sake that he may get a little cash. There are legitimate lawsuits in which people's lives have been dramatically affected, and then there are…

You don't have to feel discriminated against to be discriminated against. Corporations (and individual people) should pay for minor abuses against large groups (typically people already pay for large abuses against minor groups).

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#18

Post by vemv »

cjhopman wrote: post #16
vemv wrote: post #14

Why would to want to work for an organsisation that (supposedly) discriminates against you anyway?

Why would you want to eat at a restaurant that discriminates against you anyway? Why would you want to go to a school that discriminates against you anyway? Why would you want to ride a bus that discriminates against you anyway?

I'd be happy to not use those services.

Generally, commerce/work is a voluntary exchange between two willing parts, not a right.

Most forms of real discrimination have become extinct; now a significant % of cases (at least in the IT world) it just a bunch of complainers.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#19

Post by mike_hearn »

jedmeyers wrote: post #6
howawaygoog wrote: post #2

just got email for this, I did interview for Google and I'm over 40, (wonder how they got my info). I passed the interview but was shut down at the committee, very much doubt that age was a factor.

I've read that being rejected at a committee level happens relatively infrequent. Did they hint to what might be the reason for rejection at such a late stage?

It happens all the time. The first couple of interviews are just a phone screen. After the on-sites the packet goes to a committee, always, which makes the final decision having read all the feedbacks from all the interviews. The hiring committee isn't some last moment check/balance, it's the primary way hiring decisions are made. Or at least that's how it worked when I was an interviewer at Google.

Re: Heath and Fillekes v. Google Inc. Lawsuit

#20

Post by Beltiras »

vemv wrote: post #18
cjhopman wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you want to eat at a restaurant that discriminates against you anyway? Why would you want to go to a school that discriminates against you anyway? Why would you want to ride a bus that discriminates against you anyway?

I'd be happy to not use those services. Generally, commerce/work is a voluntary exchange between two willing parts, not a right. Most forms of real discrimination have become extinct; now a significant % of cases (at least in the IT world) it just a bunch of complainers.

Sounds like privilege talking. I'm a middle-aged white male. I try to stay mindful of my privilege when others explain perceived wrongs.
Post reply on HN