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

Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 282 posts

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#81

Post by sushid »

tedivm wrote: post #60
ASinclair wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The easy way to avoid this would be to hire people still employed by Uber. I'd say most people don't quit their job then start the interviewing process. Usually people quit once they have a new job lined up.

I have the exact opposite experience- most of the people I know here in the bay area embrace "funemployment" by having a break between leaving their jobs and getting a new one. At a minimum I wouldn't use it as a heuristic for whether the person is hirable or not.

The "funemployment" part is true, but that's usually after they secured a job and plan on starting with a bit of a break.

Otherwise their "funemployment" would be plagued with job interviews and prep.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#82

Post by dragonwriter »

randyrand wrote: post #57

I just want to say, for every person in disgust of Uber and their sexual harassment scenario, there are many more of us that just don't care. Of course, most that don't care don't comment. So the comment section is not a good view of public opinion. Just the vocal minority.

> Of course, those that don't care don't comment.

A claim contradicted by its mere existence in a post claiming to be from someone in the subject group.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#83

Post by ebcode »

randyrand wrote: post #57

I just want to say, for every person in disgust of Uber and their sexual harassment scenario, there are many more of us that just don't care. Of course, most that don't care don't comment. So the comment section is not a good view of public opinion. Just the vocal minority.

Yours is an interesting comment because of its paradoxical nature. You seem to be implying that you yourself "don't care", but then say that those that don't care don't comment, and yet here you are commenting, which would imply that you do indeed care. But then, you only care enough to say you don't care, and that there are "many more" people like you. But I don't see anyone else saying "hey, we don't care" on this thread, which leads me to believe that there actually aren't more people like you. My brain is caught in a loop!

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#84

Post by ungzd »

ramshanker wrote: post #11

Does it make having "Uber" in your Career Profile look bad now? Even if someone wants to genuinely switch job within next few month out of Uber, It would raise eyebrows at next interview table. So Uber gonna have very mall attrition rate now. Every action has both side of coin. :)

People worked in Uber are automatically considered rapists now, only if they worked for one month and fleed in panic from there.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#85

Post by gaius »

polishTar wrote: post #50
djsumdog wrote: post #14

Feels somewhat symbolic at this point. The massively corrupt shop decides to fire a bunch of people who max out the acceptable level of corruption. Even how they hired Holder feels like a PR tactic; a man who was against all the US torture techniques ( http://fightthefuture.org/articles/the-rescue-of-eric-holder... ) and yet prosecuted no one. He is the image of a career, PR frontman. I'm still going to take Lyft ove…

Firing 2 or 3 people might be symbolic. Firing >20 isn't.

... out of 12000 tho'

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#86

Post by vkou »

pyronik wrote: post #76

Are we really at the point in society if someone asks a coworker out on a date its sexual harassment? I imagine the answer to that is whether she said yes or not. Rule #1 ... be attractive.

I'm surprised that we are still at a point in society where people legitimately don't understand the difference between workplace-appropriate behaviour, and harassment.

But, to spell the difference out:

Once is asking. Twice is harassment. Propositioning a report is a fireable offense.

There's more to it, but those are the basics.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#87

Post by travmatt »

mavelikara wrote: post #29
macspoofing wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The problem is that there's a culture where sexual harassment isn't taken seriously Is there? I've seen people claim this but I haven't seen any evidence for it. I know Susan Fowler's account is used frequently as basis for that statement and though I don't doubt her sincerity and truthfulness, you can't just extrapolate her experience to the entire (global) company.

You stated: I haven't seen any evidence for it. In the very next sentence you offer one such evidence, and then go on to discredit it with you can't just extrapolate .

The mental gymnastics of motivated reasoning is a wonder to behold.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#88

Post by 5ilv3r »

macspoofing wrote: post #34
hueving wrote: post #7

I wonder if events like this turn Uber employees who leave around this time into a market of lemons. Obviously nobody will put on their resume that they were fired for sexual harassment so hiring managers will have to wonder if a person who left Uber recently was fed up or fired. Seems risky to hire a recent Uber employee at this point because bringing a toxic sexist into the company can inflict massive damage.

>Seems risky to hire a recent Uber employee at this point because bringing a toxic sexist into the company can inflict massive damage. Jesus. They are still people. You want to ostracize them from all society and prevent them from earning a living in their chosen career? 'Sexual harassment' is also a catch-all term that can encompass all kinds of actions. It could involve a clueless, inexperienced 20-something asking…

> inexperienced 20-something

Well, if he learns and grows from the experience, maybe he'll end up better than the ones that didn't fuck up.

--Former stupid as fucking fuck 20 year old

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#89

Post by fixermark »

NetStrikeForce wrote: post #39
ramshanker wrote: post #11

Does it make having "Uber" in your Career Profile look bad now? Even if someone wants to genuinely switch job within next few month out of Uber, It would raise eyebrows at next interview table. So Uber gonna have very mall attrition rate now. Every action has both side of coin. :)

I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. This is a thing and I know people turning down Uber recruiters because they don't want to be associated with Uber's wrongdoings and questionable morals.

Turning down Uber recruiters is different from other recruiters turning down ex-Uber candidates. There's no reason a person should be expected to board what they perceive to be a sinking ship.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#90

Post by StevePerkins »

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #63
erikpukinskis wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, it's not scapegoating if these people are harassing other employees. Scapegoating is when you hire underlings for projects that senior management was driving. No one forces you to harass another employee.

Err, what? Scapegoating is blaming and punishing someone in order to falsely claiming that the problem is fixed. Yes, the harassers should be fired for harassing. It doesn't fix the problem of management taking the side of harassers over the harassed.

You're both kinda correct... your original comment was just poorly phrased.

The word "scapegoat" is commonly used to describe someone who gets blamed for something unfairly. Assuming these fired employees were harassing colleagues, then it wasn't "unfair" to fire them.

But you seem to be using it in a manner similar to "fall guy". Where a lower-level wrongdoer ends up shielding higher-level wrongdoers from blame.

Post reply on HN