GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract • Hacker News Board

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#71

Post by shadowgovt » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:55 PM UTC

doctorpangloss wrote: post #67

blt wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, recognize that the company is worthless without its laborers, and that the laborers can use collective bargaining to change the company mission.

Ah yes, nothing says collective bargaining by labor like "Worker leaves company where most value is generated by automation."

It's not nearly automated enough to run on its own without an army of engineers to keep the corner cases from becoming the common cases. ;) We're nowhere near that close to a technological singularity.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#72

Post by _bfhp » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:55 PM UTC

olah_1 wrote: post #61

pm90 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ICE is not a partisan organization, Only if you have your head deliberately under the sand in the face of all the reporting that has been done so far about wanton cruelty inflicted on human beings by this agency, including but not limited to: * separation of toddlers from their parents * horrific conditions in detention facilities * detaining immigrants for as long as they possibly can * arresting and trying to dep…

People that deliberately commit crimes typically suffer all of these things, yes. If you believe that illegally crossing a border is not a crime, then that's a different discussion that could be had.

If you disagree with the Constitution (Eighth Amendment), I would lead with that caveat.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#73

Post by geofft » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:55 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #44

Miner49er wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is very much a political decision.

No it’s a neutral position not taking a stance for or against a particular business because of politics. So while it may look to someone like it’s “for” something, they’d also take business from an “ICE-alert” system, so from some PoV that would look like it’s “against”, but it’s not. It’s staying neutral.

> they’d also take business from an “ICE-alert” system

We have no evidence of this.

On the other hand, we have the statements that I literally quoted in my comment, where GitHub's COO says "it's important that ICE get its job done because they do X, Y, and Z, which are good," you have sales staff using American flag emoji, etc. Would you expect GitHub's CFO to also "it's important that this ICE-alert group get their job done because ICE does X, Y, and Z which are bad actually"?

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#74

Post by creaghpatr » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:55 PM UTC

ilikehurdles wrote: post #65

creaghpatr wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ICE is not a partisan organization, it's a government agency. If you pay taxes, you support ICE, and are their customer, period.

Whether it’s the by-the-book definition of partisan, it is still reasonable for people to have strong moral or ethical objections to working for this client.

But not to receiving their services, apparently.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#75

Post by olah_1 » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:56 PM UTC

blt wrote: post #43

mc32 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s the opposite of politics. They’re leaving politics out of it and saying, if it’s legit business we won’t deny you business.

Right, and IBM was also leaving out politics when they built custom tabulating machines to help Nazi Germany's logistics. Obvious hyperbole but you get the idea.

> IBM was also leaving out politics when they built custom tabulating machines to help Nazi Germany's logistics.

Yes. If IBM built something that helped the government during the Obama administration, would you consider it "political" too?

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#76

Post by gok » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:56 PM UTC

nrook wrote: post #9

There is a well-known strategy by which employees can exert influence over their employer and change the decisions it makes. It is called a union. Unionization has been slow for various reasons in the tech sector; when it comes to rich, well-known companies, people don't want to go through the effort to unionize and get more money when they already are being paid a lot. But if workers want to influence decisions like…

Hm so you think a GitHub union would be less likely to work with a unionized government agency?

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#77

Post by asabjorn » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:56 PM UTC

whalesalad wrote: post #31

A lot of these companies need to start sticking to their guns and simply letting people go for conflicts like this. If you’re not gonna be a team player there are a billion other tech companies you can go be a part of. I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with the core issue here – but at some point the message needs to be sent that you don’t deserve a job and aren’t owed anything. You work in exchange for cash, plain and…

Agree that doing political activism on company time to get the company to ban targets of your partisan political agenda seem highly inappropriate.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#78

Post by shadowgovt » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:57 PM UTC

olah_1 wrote: post #61

pm90 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ICE is not a partisan organization, Only if you have your head deliberately under the sand in the face of all the reporting that has been done so far about wanton cruelty inflicted on human beings by this agency, including but not limited to: * separation of toddlers from their parents * horrific conditions in detention facilities * detaining immigrants for as long as they possibly can * arresting and trying to dep…

People that deliberately commit crimes typically suffer all of these things, yes. If you believe that illegally crossing a border is not a crime, then that's a different discussion that could be had.

People who deliberately commit crimes typically suffer risk of being deported when they committed no crime because of racial profiling?

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#79

Post by bryanmgreen » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:57 PM UTC

vertex-four wrote: post #8

rpmisms wrote: post #3

Whoop-de-do. If you don't like the company, leave.

If all the employees with morals leave, GitHub will be left with no employees with morals. That is probably a worse situation.

This points to the heart of my internal debate on philosophical positioning: When is it the most moral option to not resign from companies that openly conflict with your moral compass but to fight from the inside and struggle day-by-day?

I haven't come to any definitive conclusion, but my basic thought is:

(A) If you and your allies have a decent opportunity to build a worthy competitor or work for one (ie: a similar company that aligns with your purpose), do it and shout about it from the rooftops.

(B) If you and your allies don't have enough resources to build something better, fight from the inside until you do.

Re: GitHub tries to quell employee anger over its ICE contract

#80

Post by ilikehurdles » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:57 PM UTC

creaghpatr wrote: post #74

ilikehurdles wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether it’s the by-the-book definition of partisan, it is still reasonable for people to have strong moral or ethical objections to working for this client.

But not to receiving their services, apparently.

I can’t pick and choose where my taxes go any more than I can pick and choose which constitutional amendments I want to see enforced. I can’t stop a war but I can choose not to work for military contractors.