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

Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 863 posts

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#61

Post by JonnyNova »

izacus wrote: post #22
notconservative wrote: post #21

> “Much of" Damore’s memo was probably protected under the law. ... But ... Google discharged Damore only for his "discriminatory statements," which aren’t shielded by labor law. Given how significantly many people have misunderstood Damore's claims, this seems to open up a hole for companies to mischaracterize someone as a racist/sexist/etc and then fire them over it.

Isn't employment in places where these companies operate at-will? Meaning they can fire you because you waved your hair funny in the morning?

There are certain legal limitations to that from the NLRA. tptacek goes into that in depth here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16396827

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#63

Post by twtw »

tptacek wrote: post #46
majormajor wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a do-as-we-say-not-as-we-do thing? Not living in the Bay Area, the tech industry there seems like a hotbed of privatized funding, privatized infrastructure (e.g. employee provided busses for commutes), and privatized communities (on-campus lunch, recreation, etc). Often with a strong opinion on the proper function of government: that it shouldn't restrict the actions of their companies. That all sounds just a…

Could be. Could be an owners/labor distinction too. I've never talked to a bigco developer who felt like they'd have career problems expressing liberal political views. But I have several friends, and have talked to a lot of other people, who have shared concerns about expressing conservative views. It's anecdata, but there's a lot of anecdotes to be found about it.

Here is a recent survey about the issue (387 responses):

http://joinlincoln.org/viewpoint-diversity

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#64

Post by dragonwriter »

notconservative wrote: post #21

> “Much of" Damore’s memo was probably protected under the law. ... But ... Google discharged Damore only for his "discriminatory statements," which aren’t shielded by labor law. Given how significantly many people have misunderstood Damore's claims, this seems to open up a hole for companies to mischaracterize someone as a racist/sexist/etc and then fire them over it.

> Given how significantly many people have misunderstood Damore's claims, this seems to open up a hole for companies to mischaracterize someone as a racist/sexist/etc and then fire them over it.

No, it doesn't.

Because the interpretation of the firing company doesn't determine the legality. Whether, on the evidence, a firing is solely due to actually legally unprotected statements (not statements that the employer chooses to misconstrue as unprotected) is.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#65

Post by dragonwriter »

izacus wrote: post #22
notconservative wrote: post #21

> “Much of" Damore’s memo was probably protected under the law. ... But ... Google discharged Damore only for his "discriminatory statements," which aren’t shielded by labor law. Given how significantly many people have misunderstood Damore's claims, this seems to open up a hole for companies to mischaracterize someone as a racist/sexist/etc and then fire them over it.

Isn't employment in places where these companies operate at-will? Meaning they can fire you because you waved your hair funny in the morning?

Yes, but there are still prohibited reasons for firing. Which labor organizing is one of; Damore charged that he was fired for organizing, the NLRB found that Google fired him for actions that fall outside of protected labor organizing.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#66

Post by ditonal »

tj-teej wrote: post #45
bjourne wrote: post #27

I don't agree with Damore's message. But Google cultivated an environment were open discussion were encouraged. So firing him for stating his opinion is truly, hypocritical bullshit. People should get fired for not doing their jobs -- not for writing what they think. And I also want to say that before you blame "the Left" for Google's behavior... Had he been fired in "Socialist Europe," the firing would have been dec…

You should not be put in prison for writing what you think - I think any company should be able to fire people for publicly making statements which are antithetical to the company's values.

I believe employers have a right to fire employees for speech. But as we see industry power condense to a few megacorps, ones that play gatekeeper to information access, we should look at why we value freedom of speech at the national level and be more open minded about freedom of speech and political expression in other contexts. I don't buy the cliche "it's not freedom from consequences" argument (government couldn't say jail is just a consequences, so freedom of speech does imply no consequences within its context) and I don't buy this "we can't tolerate intolerance" argument either, as there seems to be an increasingly narrow point of views that at least some people won't label intolerant (or more common, smear by association by implying your views are associated with intolerant ones)

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#67

Post by notconservative »

tptacek wrote: post #18
quaunaut wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for that explanation, it was both thorough and frankly, illuminating in a way that I wasn't expecting. Do you think if he had kept his original memo to those acceptable points(the hostile attitude toward conservative views), that they might have gone forward with it? Or would it have still been too difficult to prove with the case?

Yes. I'm summarizing not the Bloomberg article but the Advice Memo itself, which is on NLRB's case website (you can just go read it). It's a little fuzzy because the Advice Memo asserts up front that it's assuming arguendo that the memo, in both its protected and unprotected components, constituted protected concerted action. So it's possible that NLRB never really reached the question of whether this kind of organiz…

Do you have a link to the Advice Memo?

I'm having trouble finding it on nlrb.gov's site or Google w/ `site:www.nrlb.gov`.

It looks like it may be this [0][1]. But, that case doesn't mention Damore as a participant, though it does list his lawyer: Dhillon Law Group, Inc.

[0] NRLB Case: https://www.nlrb.gov/case/32-CA-205351

[1] Advice Memo (PDF): http://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d45826e6391

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#68

Post by majormajor »

tptacek wrote: post #46
majormajor wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a do-as-we-say-not-as-we-do thing? Not living in the Bay Area, the tech industry there seems like a hotbed of privatized funding, privatized infrastructure (e.g. employee provided busses for commutes), and privatized communities (on-campus lunch, recreation, etc). Often with a strong opinion on the proper function of government: that it shouldn't restrict the actions of their companies. That all sounds just a…

Could be. Could be an owners/labor distinction too. I've never talked to a bigco developer who felt like they'd have career problems expressing liberal political views. But I have several friends, and have talked to a lot of other people, who have shared concerns about expressing conservative views. It's anecdata, but there's a lot of anecdotes to be found about it.

I guess it depends somewhat on what sort of liberal views you talk about.

I'd be worried about expressing anti-data-collection, anti-large-company, pro-break-up-Google views if I were a Google employee. Biting the hand that feeds you and all... I haven't met many developers with that view, either - people are willing to talk about it on HN, but in person? I haven't found it.

Maybe the reason liberal views on diversity get all the attention is because they're the only ones that even seem within reach.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#69

Post by dragonwriter »

tptacek wrote: post #6
ghaff wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The NLRB turned down Damore's complaint. I think he could theoretically still sue in civil court? I don't think that's commonly done? Either way, his complaint was denied. There's still a civil lawsuit going ahead as the article notes.

Right, but it's on a different set of claims, isn't it? I thought it was not a case brought under the NLRA.

It's a different set of claims but they have (in regards to the specifics of Damore’s claims; it's a class action charging a broader pattern, though) substantial overlap despite the differing legal basis. Particularly, if, as NLRB found, Damore was fired solely for statements violating a legitimate anti-harassment policy, this would be quite problematic for the claims in his lawsuit. Of course, the court in that case is not bound by the NLRBs fact findings.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#70

Post by Veelox »

guyzero wrote: post #19
tptacek wrote: post #2

The first thing everyone needs to know about this is what the case was about, because it implicates one of the most powerful and least known rights tech company employees have. According to Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA, employees can't generally be disciplined for exercising the rights provided under Section 7 of the NLRA. These rights are commonly understood to be about unionizing (ie, you can't be fired for trying r…

"Damore's memo was about organizing against discrimination of conservative viewpoints --- a phenomenon that is almost certainly real in SFBA tech!" Only if you equate sexism and racism with conservatism.

I would not openly wear a "Make America Great Again" hat to my work place...
Post reply on HN