Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#21

Post by jdavis703 » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:23 PM UTC

rayvy wrote: post #3

Someone with more info please correct me: But from what I read it sounds as if Google had to pay him the $90MM+, else be sued by him right? Because if they didn't pay him, he'd sue, then they [Google] would have to prove that he [Rubin] acted maliciously (or whatever), which would've been hard (if not impossible) to do, given that the accuser said they were coerced (not forced). So it seems as if Google's hands were…

At my company the employment contract limits the company's liability if you're fired for harassment (this was standard at past places too). Executives probably have different contracts than mere rank-and-file employees though, in which case I hope we get a law that forbids companies from paying out "golden parachutes" if they conduct an investigation and find proof of sexual misconduct.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#22

Post by nostrademons » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:23 PM UTC

rayvy wrote: post #3

Someone with more info please correct me: But from what I read it sounds as if Google had to pay him the $90MM+, else be sued by him right? Because if they didn't pay him, he'd sue, then they [Google] would have to prove that he [Rubin] acted maliciously (or whatever), which would've been hard (if not impossible) to do, given that the accuser said they were coerced (not forced). So it seems as if Google's hands were…

A lot of the popular unrest facing both corporations & governments today is people learning that conflict gets results. The logic goes that "Well, Andy Rubin managed to exercise his threat to sue to get a $90M severance package, and he doesn't even work for the company anymore. We do work for the company, so we are going to exercise our power as employees to put pressure on the company to not do this again, so that our interests as current employees who don't want to work in an environment rife in sexual harassment aren't discounted." The whole point is to make the company uncomfortable so that they realize they're caught between a rock and a hard place, and the next time an executive's caught with his dick in somebody's face the company's like "Well, we really wish we could work out an amiable settlement with you for your past service, but you remember the protests when this happened with Andy Rubin? Our hands are tied here - the whole company almost fell apart, and if we avoid your lawsuit we'll just end up with a bigger one from them."

They aren't really wrong in this - the squeaky wheel gets the grease and always has, and now a much larger portion of the population is willing to squeak.

The end result probably looks like us burning most of the modern world to the ground, literally, but that's where game theory is taking us. I wonder if much of the appeal of the crypto world (where whole organizations are disintermediated in favor of smart contracts) is because people are realizing that an organization is nothing but a target for angry people, and so by getting rid of the organization and making any people behind it anonymous & fungible, you can continue to organize economic activity without painting a target on your face.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#23

Post by olliej » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:24 PM UTC

tw04 wrote: post #7

rayvy wrote: post #3

Someone with more info please correct me: But from what I read it sounds as if Google had to pay him the $90MM+, else be sued by him right? Because if they didn't pay him, he'd sue, then they [Google] would have to prove that he [Rubin] acted maliciously (or whatever), which would've been hard (if not impossible) to do, given that the accuser said they were coerced (not forced). So it seems as if Google's hands were…

Furthermore, correct me if I misread, but what he did wrong was have consensual sexual relations with a subordinate, right? And then he was fired for it (which he should be). And they protected him how? Paying him the severance package he was owed? I'm not following if that's all correct.

No, he coerced them into it - if you have a position of power, and you say "have sex with me", effectively in exchange for your treatment/employment in the company - I can't recall if Rubin was the burning man "sex or no job" guy, or that was another - that is sex discrimination and/or harassment.

I doubt Rubin would have had the same behaviour with male subordinates, so that's a difference in treatment based on gender (woman who have to sleep with him to get equal treatment, or super devil advocate here, against men unable to "sleep to the top").

The reason companies have clear rules against this - which should be super easy to enforce - is because if you are in a position of power over someone, even if it was a hypothetical case of not abusing power, the subordinate can't tell so may feel coerced. If your underling feels coerced, they are. That it was unintentional is not relevant. Note, this is distinct from consent, which may or may not apply. Certainly if it's consent related the company should be forwarding to police.

In addition to that it seems like there is a large body of evidence of what is at minimum inappropriate behaviour of any employee, let alone the management and executive tiers. Any of which should have been firable.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#24

Post by azhenley » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:27 PM UTC

dawhizkid wrote: post #20

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #10

And then, after the walk out, they will return to their desks and continue working for the company. If you want a walk out to matter, you leave... and don't come back for free food in the employee cafeteria right after.

That's like saying you should've left the country after Trump's election as an effective means of protesting his presidency.

I think these are two very different things. The cost of changing companies (especially if you are at Google) is fairly low (and often comes with a salary increase). The cost of changing citizenship could be exorbitant. People claim that if you want change in a country, you vote. If you don't believe in a company's values, you join another. Tech employees in this economy do have a lot of power. I think that is a more apt comparison.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#25

Post by roenxi » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:29 PM UTC

This article is missing a fairly important detail - the demands of the protesters. It is one thing to be unhappy with a situation, but given that the situation is now in the past - what exactly do they want to change going forward?

The article is almost scrupulous in painting the walkout as out-of-control employees rather than the precursors of organised labour.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#26

Post by philwelch » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:30 PM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #25

This article is missing a fairly important detail - the demands of the protesters. It is one thing to be unhappy with a situation, but given that the situation is now in the past - what exactly do they want to change going forward? The article is almost scrupulous in painting the walkout as out-of-control employees rather than the precursors of organised labour.

"Demands" are so passé. Most protests anymore don't have any more depth than a slogan, usually in the form of a hashtag.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#27

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:31 PM UTC

filmgirlcw wrote: post #19

jakelazaroff wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the original NY Times article [1]: > Google could have fired Mr. Rubin and paid him little to nothing on the way out. [...] > When Google fires lower-level employees, it typically marches them out immediately and pays little, if any, severance. But for senior executives, Google weighs other factors, said former executives. A wrongful termination lawsuit could mean unwanted media attention for Google and the vict…

Precisely. Quoting myself from upthread >My gut tells me that at the time of his ouster, Alphabet was worried more about the optics of a protracted lawsuit with Rubin, rather than a cover-up for a harassment claim coming to light. Presumably the other individual in the harassment case settled and signed an NDA, which would preclude public discussion and disclosure. In 2014, that may have seemed like the "safe" bet. I…

[deleted]

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#28

Post by rdl » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:32 PM UTC

nostrademons wrote: post #22

rayvy wrote: post #3

Someone with more info please correct me: But from what I read it sounds as if Google had to pay him the $90MM+, else be sued by him right? Because if they didn't pay him, he'd sue, then they [Google] would have to prove that he [Rubin] acted maliciously (or whatever), which would've been hard (if not impossible) to do, given that the accuser said they were coerced (not forced). So it seems as if Google's hands were…

A lot of the popular unrest facing both corporations & governments today is people learning that conflict gets results . The logic goes that "Well, Andy Rubin managed to exercise his threat to sue to get a $90M severance package, and he doesn't even work for the company anymore. We do work for the company, so we are going to exercise our power as employees to put pressure on the company to not do this again , so that…

This is like the business version of Assassination Politics leading to all identifiable people being utterly milquetoast and all activity happening under crypto-secure nyms.

Someone will win an Econ Nobel for this.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#29

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:32 PM UTC

kerng wrote: post #18

Google could have given him the 90 million but at the same time still call out his behavior. But what happened was that Google only said how awesome everything is and hence in fact protected and worse, basically endorsed, his behavior. I find it good that Google employees stand up here. I'm already wondering what will Google do about that other guy who gives back rubs in interviews? He got similar support and is stil…

> Google could have given him the 90 million but at the same time still call out his behavior.

Probably not; mutual non-disparagement clauses are extremely common in executive contracts. Breaking that would have been the same, in terms of kind of litigation risk, as not paying the $90 million.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#30

Post by filmgirlcw » Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 10:33 PM UTC

manfredo wrote: post #16

bdcravens wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most issues of social or civil justice typically have at least one conflict of interest. However, individuals are burned at the proverbial stake daily for far less than coercion, and the idea that Google would sweep this under the rug instead of fighting the fight is sickening to some.

But this wasn't swept under the rug. The alleged harasser was fired. Google took steps to remove the alleged harasser. Keeping the details private is standard practice and is usually something all the parties involved want. From what I'm reading, Google paid Rubin the amount he was entitled to in his contract. Some people point out that Google could have paid him next to nothing for firing him with cause - but Rubin…

But it was swept under the rug. He got a splashy send-off and a thanks for his service. At the very least, that seems over the top.

The reasons for his ouster weren't disclosed. I would be curious if Essential's investors (Redpoint, Altimeter, Amazon Alexa Fund) were aware of why Rubin left Google.

Moreover, this is a pattern at Google. Amit Singhal[1] was fired (also with a send-off and goodbye party and settled outstanding grants) after accusations of harassment were found credible.

He then landed as SVP of engineering at Uber, where he was forced to resign because he hadn't disclosed the prior HR complaint at Google. Now, obviously, the lack of disclosure is what did him in -- but why did Google not tell Uber that he was asked to leave during his background check?

Yes, Rubin likely would have sued. Yes, it likely would have been messy and very public. No, I do not believe for a second that Google settled to "protect" the victim; Google's settlement with the the alleged victim was certainly less than $90m.

Google settled b/c in 2014, the drama of fighting with someone like Rubin seemed more risky than just paying him off -- even with the risk that the reasons why might become public later. The climate of 2018 makes me believe that was a fundamental mistake and the company should have fought back to not pay money that a labor attorney could argue was not owed.

[1]: https://www.recode.net/2017/2/27/14745360/amit-singhal-googl...