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

One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 603 posts

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#351

Post by bregma »

rhodysurf wrote: post #328
matthewmacleod wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, though, that politics is inherently tied up in actions related to the workplace. Let’s say one of your colleagues or managers occasionally makes decisions that would be frowned upon by some people. Maybe you’re recruiting, and they let slip that they passed over a female candidate because they thought she might have a child soon. Or maybe they passed on a gay man because they didn’t think he should be…

Those examples are not really political, but they are illegal.

They were commonplace and accepted twenty years ago. They're illegal now because of politics and political activism.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#352

Post by [deleted] »

JohnBooty wrote: post #349
mrrrgn wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to figure out what you mean by "white supremacy" because you use it so often it seems like something nebulous. -- So it seems that "white supremacy" is a catchall term for anything that argues a biological basis for group differences. Thank you for the links and for not just being aghast that I didn't know this. :]

We'll Google it for you. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/James_Damore#Sex_and_drugs_and... RationalWiki has a very opinionated take on things, but that article is very well-sourced (75 linked sources!) so you can read right up. Now, it could fairly be said that his pro-KKK arguments were more "glib humor" than endorsement and I'd agree. I would also say it's part of the pattern of negative workplace behavior that got h…

[deleted]

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#353

Post by [deleted] »

rhodysurf wrote: post #328
matthewmacleod wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, though, that politics is inherently tied up in actions related to the workplace. Let’s say one of your colleagues or managers occasionally makes decisions that would be frowned upon by some people. Maybe you’re recruiting, and they let slip that they passed over a female candidate because they thought she might have a child soon. Or maybe they passed on a gay man because they didn’t think he should be…

Those examples are not really political, but they are illegal.

[deleted]

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#354

Post by steelframe »

matwood wrote: post #264
cheeze wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money, "Impact", resources. This is a very HN comment, but I'm not sure how you can't see why someone would want to work for bigcorp...

There is a lot of money out there. And, if you don't have to live near a FAANG the money you do make can go much farther. Does the rank and file really have much impact at one of the FAANG companies? I've talked to some ex-Google employees who left so they could have an impact somewhere. The FAANGs do have effectively infinite resources, but compute has been for the most part democratized. Resources are very inexpens…

> if you don't have to live near a FAANG the money you do make can go much farther

I have a friend who moved to the Utah/Idaho region, giving up a FAANG job, in order to escape the spiraling cost of living where the FAANG jobs are. I respect that.

I'm at my third FAANG living in one of the high-cost-of-living areas of the U.S. In the meantime I'm planning my escape. So long as income vastly outstrips my cost of living, I'm going to keep my FAANG and save like there's no tomorrow, and as soon as the math works out that I can maintain my current quality of life with a combination of a lower-paying job combined with interest on my savings (the proverbial 4% withdrawal rate) in a lower-cost-of-living area of the U.S., I'm out.

Er, yeah, less effective application of that figure of speech. You know what I mean.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#355

Post by behringer »

dghughes wrote: post #303
cptskippy wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Being fired from Google amounts to not just losing a job but "friends" and the only people who the company encouraged socializing with. I've never worked for Google so I have no basis for comparison but it's very common across white collar jobs for employees social circles to very closely if not entirely overlap with work. Unless you participated in extracurricular activities that weren't school sponsored, you prob…

> Being fired from Google amounts to not just losing a job but "friends" and the only people who the company encouraged socializing with. That's something I experienced. I was laid off after 15 years and really I was laid off from my friends too. The company even monitored social media accounts which at the time seemed bizarre but now it's common. I was told by someone still working there HR declared unfriending a fe…

I had a coworker I was training start crying because she got offered a better job and was going to lose all her new friends. I had to explain to her that her coworkers aren't her friends, her friends are whoever she wants.

This culture of being friends with your coworkers is odd to me. My coworkers suck as friends, the vast majority of the time. And heaven forbid you don't want to be friends anymore, because now you're stuck with them. I have much better luck making friends by joining and participating in clubs dedicated to my hobbies.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#356

Post by matthewmacleod »

alfromspace wrote: post #344
matthewmacleod wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, though, that politics is inherently tied up in actions related to the workplace. Let’s say one of your colleagues or managers occasionally makes decisions that would be frowned upon by some people. Maybe you’re recruiting, and they let slip that they passed over a female candidate because they thought she might have a child soon. Or maybe they passed on a gay man because they didn’t think he should be…

Nice examples. Can we use some that are probably 100x more common at Google? Maybe you’re recruiting, and they let slip that they passed over a white male candidate because they're working on a new diversity initiative. Or maybe, after being trained constantly on gender bias and seeing vigorous workplace political debates on the subject, you investigate the issue and find no evidence to support anything other than th…

I don’t understand the point you are attempting to make. These are all political acts. The fact that you like some of them and dislike others doesn’t change that. Even the choice of sketching the “hard-done-by innocent researcher cruelly hounded out of his job” is a political act. This is the point - how do you isolate that from the workplace when it’s clearly so tied up in it?

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#357

Post by kelnos »

helen___keller wrote: post #335
stronglikedan wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With 20 years experience under my belt, it is my firm belief that the workplace is not a place to discuss politics, religion, or other highly personal and divisive issues. I, too, old this belief, but it's kind of hard when the "new culture" is overwhelmed with a sense of entitlement to "be heard". Everyone thinks their individual opinions should be able to be shared whenever they feel the need to be validated, and…

Everything is relative to the discussion and beliefs at hand. If you want to disagree about fried chicken, fine, have your beliefs even if I think you're wrong. If you want to disagree about, say, LGBT rights, then I will probably deem that you are the bad person. That's how strong, deeply held beliefs work. I'm sure if I tried hard I could come up with an example of a belief that would make you consider me a bad per…

I think it's both what you and the parent are saying.

People in the younger generation (myself somewhat included in that) do feel extra entitlement toward saying what they want, when they want, in whatever forum they want. But it's a lot harder nowadays to keep one's personal and professional lives completely separate. I'd lean toward considering this trend a good thing; we don't work in a vacuum. Activism absolutely does have a place in a professional setting when so many social and political issues contribute to discrimination in the workplace.

At the same time, making judgments about the parent's values is a bit out of line. Some people really do just want to go to the office, put in a full day of work, and go home where their "real" life happens. I personally think that's a limiting attitude, but don't begrudge people their need or desire to go that route.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#359

Post by Faark »

repolfx wrote: post #247
cryptica wrote: post #214

>> The tracking had made the staff in those departments feel unsafe It's very strange how often this idea of 'feeling unsafe' is coming up in the media now. It seems that either: - People have become more fragile/sensitive; or - People have become more aggressive. I think it may be both. I think corporations create extremely unnatural, oppressive and coercive environments which makes people more outwardly sensitive b…

Physical safety trumps most other things in our culture, rightly so. So political activists realised they can brainwash or pressure idiots by claiming that any opinion, person or class of people they don't like creates "lack of safety". It's a kneejerk reaction: safety first. The worst case I saw of this so far was an event organised by my workplace, for teaching programming. But straight white men were banned. If yo…

> So political activists realised they can brainwash or pressure idiots by claiming that any opinion, person or class of people they don't like creates "lack of safety". It's a kneejerk reaction: safety first.

People didn't just suddenly start killing jews in nazi germany. It starts with a shift in sentiment and you probably want to stop that before it gains momentum. That makes me understand how e.g. the "there are good people on both sides" comment made people feel unsafe.

> workplace example

That seems so much like a right wing caricature of "the left" that I'd like to read a source to make sure it isn't just exactly that. Not that I'd expect this to never happen... stupid people can be found everywhere in society. A more plausible scenario leading to this might be affirmative action (something I'd expect you to vehemently disagree with anyway) having its budged cut and someone still trying to go through with it by combining multiple things into one, even if this subverts pretty much the entire purpose. I'd expect reasonable lefties to have a similar stance on gayness checks as they have for sex checks on bathrooms... people will generally do the right thing and abusers should suffer consequences.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#360

Post by helen___keller »

stronglikedan wrote: post #348
helen___keller wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything is relative to the discussion and beliefs at hand. If you want to disagree about fried chicken, fine, have your beliefs even if I think you're wrong. If you want to disagree about, say, LGBT rights, then I will probably deem that you are the bad person. That's how strong, deeply held beliefs work. I'm sure if I tried hard I could come up with an example of a belief that would make you consider me a bad per…

It's definitely entitlement when your supposed "right to be heard" on non-work-related issues seems more important than the workplace disruption it causes.

Well, I can't speak for your experiences because I don't know your experiences.

What is "right to be heard" mean? For me it usually means employees speak their concerns with management, and management is receptive enough (ie they care about employee retention) that if something is really bad they hold a Q&A session. Maybe act on it.

I'm an empowered, high-demand employee in a high demand industry. If management doesn't want to hear about my concerns, that's fine and they can say so. I'll find another employer in less than a week.

Edit: to give a more concrete example, my employer was in talks to write software for client X, a corporation well known for being Bad People™️. A bunch of employees came forward that they didn't want to do business with client X. Management discussed it thoroughly with these employees, hosted public roundtables, etc. I wasn't part of this discussion so I can't say the outcome, but yes the employees who cared demanded a right to be heard, because often that's why we work for progressive employers in the first place.

Post reply on HN