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

Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#911

Post by jlawson »

TheGRS wrote: post #668
jdm2212 wrote: post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The American political spectrum is way bigger than the political spectrum in most European countries. There's a lot more potential for deep disagreement in the US when people talk politics.

I'm American and I've had plenty of political discussions on polar opposite political sides at work or with colleagues at a bar or wherever. There's two lines that should not be crossed: the obvious one is threatening someone's job due to politics, but the more nuanced one is mistrusting someone professionally based on their political affiliation or opinions. I suspect some on this discussion are also conflating poli…

What part of Damore's memo do you think was 'discriminatory' in an 'unacceptable' way? Please be specific, because this is into bizarro-world territory from my point of view.

I read it and saw an attempt at proposing policies to increase female representation based on a collection of science papers about differences in behavior between men and women.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#912

Post by thebruce87m »

closeparen wrote: post #905
magduf wrote: post #531

This is pretty strange to me. I've worked in a bunch of very different places, including Intel Corp. and also defense contractors and US government installations, and people generally stayed away from political discussions unless they were around people they already knew were like-minded. The only place I saw political discussion turn really sour was at Intel when we had a contractor who was extremely religious and c…

Many of my teammates are immigrants. Visa related uncertainty and progress are major parts of their lives. The H1-B renewal lottery colors all future plans. Finally getting a green card is like having a child or buying a house. When the President tweets about blowing up NAFTA, my colleagues on TN-1s can no longer be sure which country they'll live in six months from now. We tried to go for drinks and couldn't get int…

They wouldn’t let her in to the bar because her license had expired? What do they care as long as it has the correct DOB on it?

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#913

Post by TheOperator »

jgunsch wrote: post #448
oppositelock wrote: post #187

I worked at Google for quite a while, 2005-2013, and even then, the internal political discussion was pretty toxic, but a lot smaller in scope since there are far fewer people. There were definitely groups meant for discussing politics, and loudmouths like me willingly participated in those - however, it was very uncivil. There was a majority view in the company, and if anyone didn't agree with the majority view, the…

I worked there for a similar length of time, but more recent (2012 - early 2019). The internal political discourse over that time definitely mirrored the rest of the world: becoming increasingly heated and divisive during 2016 and largely escalating since. On the whole, it felt like it pushed the company in a positive direction --- internal discussions mirroring #metoo led to more visibility of sexual harassment and…

I felt the Damore affair exposed a perverse situation. Essentially anybody denying that there were an equal number of women equally inclined towards and capable of performing in a certain industry is used as proof of systemic discrimination. Leaving that uncontested also proves systemic discrimination since there are less women in the field proving the sexism. Then when people get upset that they're being discriminated against and lash out that also proves the sexism. Yet when I talk to just about every ordinary person on the street there is just about nobody who believes women and men have a 50:50 inclination towards all types of work besides fringe egalitarians.

If an honest discussion cannot take place that yes women are discriminated against, but that yes men and women DO in fact differ, then affirmative action will inevitably stop being about stopping sexism and start being about forcing equity as time goes on. You would have to apply a LOT of oppressive systemic sexism and force a whole lot of people male and female into jobs they're bad at and unhappy with to fix inequity in tech. Currently the reaction to people pointing out the looming problem is to fire that autistic employee for sexism and for the CEO to make a public apology.

Damore was just ahead of his time. Affirmative action hasn't distorted tech enough to destroy itself yet.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#914

Post by jogjayr »

ashwinaj wrote: post #133

Finally common sense prevails! Get to work on time, eat your free lunch, work, go home. To those of you who disagree; if you want to "make a difference" take a cue from Gandhi, Mandela, Martin Luther king Jr. etc. Mahama Gandhi didn't work for the East India company while simultaneously fighting for freedom. If you are serious about it put your money where your mouth is and stop being empty vessels.

> Mahama Gandhi didn't work for the East India company while simultaneously fighting for freedom.

Given that the East India Company was dissolved when he was 5, this would've been difficult.[1][2]

He did however work in the ambulance corps for the British Army in the Boer War. And advocated for cooperation with the British government in WW1 right up until the Jalianwala Bagh massacre.[3]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi

3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi#Champaran_and_K...

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#915

Post by scoobyyabbadoo »

closeparen wrote: post #905
magduf wrote: post #531

This is pretty strange to me. I've worked in a bunch of very different places, including Intel Corp. and also defense contractors and US government installations, and people generally stayed away from political discussions unless they were around people they already knew were like-minded. The only place I saw political discussion turn really sour was at Intel when we had a contractor who was extremely religious and c…

Many of my teammates are immigrants. Visa related uncertainty and progress are major parts of their lives. The H1-B renewal lottery colors all future plans. Finally getting a green card is like having a child or buying a house. When the President tweets about blowing up NAFTA, my colleagues on TN-1s can no longer be sure which country they'll live in six months from now. We tried to go for drinks and couldn't get int…

>Many of my teammates are immigrants. Visa related uncertainty and progress are major parts of their lives. The H1-B renewal lottery colors all future plans. Finally getting a green card is like having a child or buying a house.

Getting a Green Card shouldn't be that easy for H1B holders. An H1B visa is a temporary visa and in that time they should be transferring skill knowledge to American replacements.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#916

Post by jlawson »

wbronitsky wrote: post #803
malandrew wrote: post #770

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me modify your statement so you can realize how absurd and sexist it is: > Men shouldn't have to pick and choose who they feel comfortable working with around the office. It is just as ridiculous if you make it about race: > [Black|Asian|White|Latino] people shouldn't have to pick and choose who they feel comfortable working with around the office. This is the fatal flaw of modern day progressives. They make ever…

I don't think your statements are as self evident as you think they are. You are personally attacking the poster above you, and then just spinning words around to make a point you agree with. We understand you agree with yourself; would you care to help us try and agree with you? Personally, I agree with your statements. I do not see the issue that you see with wanting all people to be comfortable in their workplace.…

>James Damore outright stated that he believes that women are genetically inferior at the job he does.

Outright? Certainly not. It requires multiple layers of hostile interpretation to reach 'women are genetically inferior' from what Damore wrote. That's an absolutist, determinist, morally-tinged statement which is nothing like anything he said.

If you think otherwise, please give the quote where Damore outright states women are 'genetically inferior' at anything.

Damore was extremely clear about the difference between "all men have X trait more than women" and "statistically, the prevalence of X trait is higher among men than women (but some women still have a lot of X)". He even included visual aids to help explain these concepts, literally on the first page of the memo.

If your mind integrates the studies Damore cited as stating that women are 'genetically inferior', that's something you need to learn to decouple. We don't have to choose between anti-science denialism and fascistic supremacism, so please don't try to force everyone's opinions into one of those two categories.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#917

Post by cm2187 »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #867
paulddraper wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was completely just as Damore basically wrote a dissertation about things that were completely unrelated It was a completely inconsistent. Damore was not fired for debating politically-sensitive HR proposals. Many people were involved in the same conversation, with the same degree of relevance to Google's products. Damore was fired because his proposal was contrary to the majority. --- It's possible to maintain…

If your assertion were true, all people who ever voiced a minority opinion would be fired and that’s clearly not true.

I think everyone else took notice that expressing conservative opinions in writing was a fireable offense.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#918

Post by notzuck »

KSteffensen wrote: post #900
notzuck wrote: post #871

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Utter nonsense - the lack of politcal discourse at work does not result in worse politics generally. Politics at work has long been a no no at most companies and there's no evidence to show this has caused the rise of any extremism. Work is where you get your work done. There is no room for you opinions on Trump etc, whether positive or negative. Your political views can very easily marginalise others especially when…

Lack of respectful political discourse in general results in worse politics. It should be possible to talk (and disagree) about politics without it affecting work cooperation. I'm not sure whether the fact that it's not, is a cause or a symptom of the current political climate.

I don't think that's true at all. The best teams I've ever worked on had zero political discourse.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#919

Post by PeterStuer »

jgunsch wrote: post #448
oppositelock wrote: post #187

I worked at Google for quite a while, 2005-2013, and even then, the internal political discussion was pretty toxic, but a lot smaller in scope since there are far fewer people. There were definitely groups meant for discussing politics, and loudmouths like me willingly participated in those - however, it was very uncivil. There was a majority view in the company, and if anyone didn't agree with the majority view, the…

I worked there for a similar length of time, but more recent (2012 - early 2019). The internal political discourse over that time definitely mirrored the rest of the world: becoming increasingly heated and divisive during 2016 and largely escalating since. On the whole, it felt like it pushed the company in a positive direction --- internal discussions mirroring #metoo led to more visibility of sexual harassment and…

History is full of nasty stories of groups of people pushing towards creating a 'just' world.

Absolute conviction of righteousness leads to polarazation leads to extremism as nuanced opinions are projected onto the anti-pole. 'You are either with us or against us', 'You are part of the (our) solution or part of the problem', 'the end justifies the means', 'you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs' ...

The art of moderation seems completely lost as people are swept up in a never ending exaggerated and overexposed arena that requires pledges of allegiance and virtue signalling, demonization and sacrificing above and beyond all reason.

I'm not advocating everyone just shut the hell up, but the moment you when asked would not be able to switch sides in a debate and plead the opposite's case because you are so far down the path that you can not imagine anything but 'pure evil' as the motivations behind your opponent, you are no longer a valid contributor to the conversation, you are just part of a lynch mob out for blood.

Re: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore

#920

Post by cm2187 »

SllX wrote: post #808
ChuckMcM wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree, but I will contrast that with my later experience at IBM (when they bought Blekko). IBM had at the time 400,000+ employees, so more than four times the employee base of Google. IBM is over a hundred years old at this point so have been doing this about five times longer than Google has. In IBM's case they came at it from the opposite direction. Fifty years ago there was practically zero horizontal c…

You raise an excellent point, and going over-totalitarian is just as likely to crush innovation as anything else. However, I think taking an authoritarian stance on politics, religion and so on in the workplace, so long as it is done in a respectful manner and puts everyone on the same level, is completely appropriate. When you are a group of ten, and that’s your entire company, you can get away with a lot. Everyone…

Typically, bureaucracy and internal policies are what kills innovation in large established companies, not lack of political debate. It takes so much energy and internal politics to make the smallest changes that an organisation constituted of otherwise smart knowledgeable people will only produce mediocrity.
Post reply on HN