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

At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 234 posts

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#71

Post by pjc50 »

ue_ wrote: post #51
Bartweiss wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually a pretty widely-recognized cult tactic. People are grouped together for shaming sessions where they confess failings and are berated for them. It's nominally about bonding and seeing that everyone has failings, but as you point out that doesn't get problems solved. In practice, it creates social pressure to confess errors (you don't want to act superior to those around you), plus top down pressure ("con…

I don't think such meetings ought to aim at individuals, in fact this is what I wanted to avoid, rather it would be good to talk about processes in general, and to admit faults like that; I think this would be a much clearer way of making progress than to start a blame game or criticise people covertly, which usually ends up festering and turning into hate. I think people should be open about themselves, and construc…

The main lesson of aircraft safety culture should be that you can have an enquiry to establish what happened, or an enquiry to find out who's to blame - but not both, since once you start assigning blame there's a motive to conceal or destroy evidence.

> no secrecy

This is a nightmare for the person who's percieved underperforming due to unavoidable health issues that they've discussed with their manager/HR but would prefer to keep secret.

> social pressure to confess errors

This turns into bullying very quickly.

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#72

Post by HarryHirsch »

scott_s wrote: post #35
KKKKkkkk1 wrote: post #7

I feel this might be problematic. The Soviet block countries had something called a culture of criticism and self-criticism. As part of this culture, factories would orchestrate meetings in which people who ran afoul of party management were publicly humiliated by their colleagues and ostracized. What's wrong with simply firing people who are implicated in harassment and possibly reporting them to law enforcement?

> What's wrong with simply firing people who are implicated in harassment and possibly reporting them to law enforcement? Nothing, but that's not what this is. For a variety of reasons, people are reluctant to report incidents through official channels. This is an unofficial and anonymous channel. It's a way to make people aware that yes, things are happening, even if no official action is taken. I hope it makes peop…

My experience has been that for a sanity check a discussion with a trusted colleague in a different department is worth a lot. If XY is genuinely concerning then that person will say "yeah, I've found that, too, and it's really concerning". What's with the need for a formal shame list and for establishing an Akashic record?

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#73

Post by pjc50 »

MichaelGG wrote: post #59

> "Subsequently informed by the engineer that she was expected to 'sleep with everyone' because that's the culture here." I'm rather "unenlightened"/regressive/whatever from a SV perspective. But... If there wasn't a significant power difference here, like an intern vs someone senior, how does this even happen? I mean, I get it if it was one-on-one, even a direct boss might pressure someone into that. But "sleep with…

It's a common abuse tactic: establish the behaviour you want as "normal" and gaslight people who object. Often it works. It's also the sort of thing that people can very easily explain away as "joke", "hazing", etc.

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#74

Post by feedjoelpie »

zeveb wrote: post #55
pflats wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's ridiculous. Leave is leave; it's an employee's right that's offered in law or in their contract, and they should not be punished in any way for taking advantage of it. If the employee would otherwise exceed expectations and took paternity leave, then they still exceed expectations. If they were hired in March and worked for 40 weeks, they would not be penalized for failing to work in January or February. Leave…

> Leave is leave; it's an employee's right that's offered in law or in their contract, and they should not be punished in any way for taking advantage of it. Being rated as someone who meets expectations is not a punishment. Certainly, one has the right to exercise one's rights, but one also has a duty to acknowledge that they impact others. Someone who takes paternity leave will, mutatis mutandis, achieve less than…

> Being rated as someone who meets expectations is not a punishment.

On a scale of 1, 2, and 3, where each of these confers different privileges, when I knock you down from a 3 to a 2 specifically because of X, I am punishing you for X.

The corporate words tied to the ratings are not magical.

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#75

Post by sjg007 »

nxc18 wrote: post #26
snomad wrote: post #8

> One employee said that during a one-on-one performance review with a manager, he was told that his rating dropped from "Exceeds" to "Meets" because he didn't get as much done while on paternity leave. If true, that is quite obviously legally actionable.

I get why there should be protection for people on paternity leave. At the same time, if you're using an 'expectations' system appropriately and honestly (as opposed to just a renaming of some other scale) it may be dishonest to not change his rating. If there is an expectation about performance and it wasn't exceeded (how could you exceed your typical performance while on paternity leave?) then the employee shouldn'…

I mean there should be a zero expectation policy if you are on paternity leave. Then if you actually get something done, then you're by definition "exceeds". That's the logical approach. Or you just don't have a performance review for that period.

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#76

Post by wcarron »

snomad wrote: post #8

> One employee said that during a one-on-one performance review with a manager, he was told that his rating dropped from "Exceeds" to "Meets" because he didn't get as much done while on paternity leave. If true, that is quite obviously legally actionable.

I'm not so sure. Wouldn't a person on paternity leave be expected to perform less, if not zero work? By doing that, didn't he "meet" expectations? That seems, technically speaking, the accurate description.

Of course, if paternity leave really means "we expect you to work at a similar rate", then it's quite obviously not a "paternity leave" in anything other than name.

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#77

Post by scott_s »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #72
scott_s wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's wrong with simply firing people who are implicated in harassment and possibly reporting them to law enforcement? Nothing, but that's not what this is. For a variety of reasons, people are reluctant to report incidents through official channels. This is an unofficial and anonymous channel. It's a way to make people aware that yes, things are happening, even if no official action is taken. I hope it makes peop…

My experience has been that for a sanity check a discussion with a trusted colleague in a different department is worth a lot. If XY is genuinely concerning then that person will say "yeah, I've found that, too, and it's really concerning". What's with the need for a formal shame list and for establishing an Akashic record?

My understanding from the article was that it doesn't name the offenders. (The one exception being the Alphabet CEO from a public meeting.) To me, that precludes it from being a "shame list."

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#78

Post by jlebar »

I'm sad to see so many comments here worrying about such a list becoming "weaponized".

TFA says that the list is anonymous, and that "usually, the people in the complaints are not named" (the cited exception being naming Eric Schmidt, the CEO, for behavior during a large company meeting). You're not going to publicly shame someone without naming them, so clearly that's not the intent or effect.

The point of the list, again from TFA, is to raise awareness about bad things that happen at Google, often outside the view of privileged white men like myself. With 20% of the company subscribed, it sounds like it's working.

This trope of jumping immediately to the problem of false accusations is sadly common in discussions e.g. of rape reporting. Yes, some reports of rape (and harassment) are untrue. The vast majority aren't. Jumping so quickly, as many comments here have, to considering effects of fake reports is wildly disrespectful of the (largely female, and thus underrepresented here and at places like Google) victims, and is part of the reason that rape and sexual assault go underreported.

I would encourage those of you who have such a reaction to step back and consider why people might submit anonymously to such a list, and what benefits a company might get from having one.

Disclaimer: I work at Google, and speak here (as always) for myself.

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#79

Post by auserperson »

MichaelGG wrote: post #59

> "Subsequently informed by the engineer that she was expected to 'sleep with everyone' because that's the culture here." I'm rather "unenlightened"/regressive/whatever from a SV perspective. But... If there wasn't a significant power difference here, like an intern vs someone senior, how does this even happen? I mean, I get it if it was one-on-one, even a direct boss might pressure someone into that. But "sleep with…

The engineer is probably lying and gaslighting, as they lied about having other colleagues there. It seems like a very toxic person trying to create a situation of abuse. It's sad but not unheard of. (there's awful people in the world).

Re: At Google, an Employee-Run Email List Tracks Harassment and Bias Complaints

#80

Post by Chris2048 »

d3ad1ysp0rk wrote: post #68
Chris2048 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Keep that kind of dialogue out of the workplace. Or freely leave until you find a place that's cool.

"Cool" for me isn't somewhere that I can say anything I want without concern for how it affects others. Cool is inclusive.

But that's a strawman, since I didn't say that.

You talk of vague "inclusivity", and hyperbolic "say anything I want"; but the post specifically referred to "Calling someone a 'princess' for liking salads" - when are we going to be inclusive of differing opinions and forms of expression? Seems a very specific interpretational framework is being mandated here.

Using rough language versus running off to HR when offended - I know who I'd prefer working with.

Post reply on HN