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

Google staff walk out over women's treatment

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 471 posts

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#351

Post by goatsi »

eqdw wrote: post #311
rwmj wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully to more people in tech joining unions. Plenty of other well-paid professions are unionised (eg. doctors). For full disclosure I've been a member of Prospect, a non-affiliated union in the UK, for a few years. One of the advantages is free access to legal advice about employment issues.

Most tech offices (google included) already give all employees free access to legal resources. It's called an EAP (Employee Assistance Program)

Is that access to company legal resources or vouchers to independent lawyers? There is a big difference, especially when the legal issue is employment related.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#352

Post by jshevek »

sizzle wrote: post #314

"A clear, uniform, globally inclusive process for reporting sexual misconduct safely and anonymously " Can anyone help me understand the rationale behind the anonymous part, with respect to due process and how the framework for anonymous accusations can be abused by bad actors? Edit - I have a question about the anonymous nature of reporting to HR, with respect to due process for the accuser and accused, maybe some o…

I have trouble imagining truly complete anonymity being helpful. This is an invitation to abuse the system. Abuse could result from personal conflicts and office politics, or even people who wish to undermine the system itself by entering bad data.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#353

Post by orf »

malvosenior wrote: post #318
astura wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, FFS, c'mon. There's over 12,800 words in the article and 67 citations. It includes sections such as "How do work experience, schedules, and motherhood affect the gender wage gap?", "How do education and job and occupational characteristics affect the gender wage gap?", "Does a woman’s race, age, or pay level affect the gender gap she experiences?", and "What role do 'unobservables' like discrimination and product…

It's an argument against adjusted wage gap calculations or comparing salaries in the same roles. I fundamentally object to the very premise. > You're arguing on bad faith here. No, I just disagree with you.

No, you're clearly arguing in bad faith with him and you clearly have not read the article. The sections titled "Women earn less than men at every wage level" and "How might discrimination—in the form of norms and expectations—be affecting the wage gap by constraining women’s choices?" might be enlightening to you, given your original cherry picked issue.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#354

Post by jshevek »

gingerbread-man wrote: post #321
sizzle wrote: post #314

"A clear, uniform, globally inclusive process for reporting sexual misconduct safely and anonymously " Can anyone help me understand the rationale behind the anonymous part, with respect to due process and how the framework for anonymous accusations can be abused by bad actors? Edit - I have a question about the anonymous nature of reporting to HR, with respect to due process for the accuser and accused, maybe some o…

Maybe they're referencing something like Callisto (YC Nonprofit W18): "Founders will be able to use Callisto to securely store the identities of perpetrators of sexual coercion and assault. These identities will be encrypted in a way that not even the Callisto team can view. If multiple founders name the same perpetrator, they will be referred to an attorney who can then decrypt the founder’s contact info and reach o…

Thank you for offering this. This is far more helpful than a truly anonymous system.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#355

Post by DoreenMichele »

solipsism wrote: post #329
DoreenMichele wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, "words are cheap" is so obvious, it goes without saying. It doesn't add anything substantive to the discussion. So saying that to me really doesn't cast any light whatsoever on this situation for me.

If someone at the top is sincerely interested in resolving this satisfactorily, why the walk-out? I don't get it. That just sounds so naive. If I knew what your real disconnect with this was, I'd try to help you understand. Let's walk through the basics: * Employees have a problem with management. * Management says "we'll work on it" like they always do. * Employees may or may not believe, but they want to see action…

That just sounds so naive.

I appear to be the top ranked woman on HN. I appear to be the only woman to have ever spent time on the leaderboard here (under a different handle). Historical surveys suggest the membership was possibly as much as 98% male at one time.

I get nothing but crapped on when I say that. I get nothing but mocked when I suggest that is indicative of personal competence on my part. People mostly admit to recognizing me at all in order to say something dickish. It's relatively rare that I get genuine support.

I got to the leaderboard by not grandstanding, not pissing on all the guys here, etc.

I'm not naive, though I may well be on my way out the door because I've been thrown off of plenty of other forums for saying "The emperor has no clothes." It's generally a socially unacceptable thing to do.

But it doesn't come out of naiveté by any stretch of the imagination whatsoever.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#356

Post by tootahe45 »

brobdingnagians wrote: post #11
n4r9 wrote: post #3

Interesting to contrast this story with Damore's claims of left-wing bias and overemphasis on diversity and inclusion. It's uncomfortable exercise to put myself in the shoes of a young woman considering applying to Google; the prospect of unwanted advances from higher-ups and suspicions from the occasional peer of being hired for my gender might be enough to put me off completely.

The interesting thing is that the #MeToo movement naturally targeted a lot of liberals, because almost everyone in Hollywood is liberal. The right also has some issues with harassment, etc. but the left is far from immune to having it and in some ways has more trouble. I'm not sure why that is, but the "free love" and unrestrained sexual expression type culture of the left might have something to do with it.

It's called white knighting, you see it a lot with feminist men who are often the abusers.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#357

Post by [deleted] »

billylindeman wrote: post #339
gingerbread-man wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Total anonymity for accusers is indeed a concerning policy, but partial anonymity (i.e. from one's own team) isn't unreasonable. It ought to be possible to properly investigate misconduct allegations while minimizing the potential for gossip and recriminations.

I think that due process should include the right to face your accuser.

[deleted]

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#358

Post by anigbrowl »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #348
anigbrowl wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That escalated quickly, to the extent that it reflects poorly on your original question.

You aren't anyone I particularly care to hear criticism from of me personally for any reason whatsoever, especially not publicly on HN.

It's not a criticism of you personally. The last time we had a conversation was before you created this HN account and I didn't look at you bio before reacting to your comment.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#359

Post by DisruptiveDave »

stale2002 wrote: post #338
sizzle wrote: post #314

"A clear, uniform, globally inclusive process for reporting sexual misconduct safely and anonymously " Can anyone help me understand the rationale behind the anonymous part, with respect to due process and how the framework for anonymous accusations can be abused by bad actors? Edit - I have a question about the anonymous nature of reporting to HR, with respect to due process for the accuser and accused, maybe some o…

This worry is unfounded. Harassment is rarely the case of a single incident. Instead, people who harass other usually have a long history of harassing lots of people. An anonymous complaint could be used not to determine guilt, but instead to trigger an investigation. And if the person is guilty, then the investigation will almost certainly have a very easy time finding somebody , likely many, who will go on record w…

And if they are innocent? That investigation will come with an impact to the accused. A serious one.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#360

Post by DoreenMichele »

anigbrowl wrote: post #358
DoreenMichele wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You aren't anyone I particularly care to hear criticism from of me personally for any reason whatsoever, especially not publicly on HN.

It's not a criticism of you personally. The last time we had a conversation was before you created this HN account and I didn't look at you bio before reacting to your comment.

I don't care what your justification or excuse is.

If you* can't figure out that Mz and Her First Name and Middle Name are the same person, you aren't paying attention. And that means your criticism is completely vacuous on the face of it, even before we get into other reasons I have no interest in your opinion that would likely be verboten here as some kind of personal attack.

* You personally, not the general "you".

Post reply on HN