51–60 of 779 posts
My contribution is that it’s foolish to react too quickly to a story like this.
If the headline were accurate, it would be such an obvious own-goal on the part of Google HR, it beggars belief.
I think the wise course is to wait until more details are made public before getting worked up about it.
Did no one read the article? > Spiers, 21, said she went through the standard approval process, which requires two co-workers to greenlight changes, before updating the Chrome browser extension. Another source at Google familiar with the update approval process confirmed to NBC news that those two approvals are standard practice for a browser extension update. She did it exactly according to internal policy. The exte…
I doubt thats the spirit of the rule. I would no more want that injected into my browser than any other political message.
>Kathryn Spiers, who worked as a security engineer, updated an internal Chrome browser extension so that each time Google employees visited the website of IRI Consultants — the Troy, Michigan, firm that Google hired this year amid a groundswell of labor activism at the company — they would see a pop-up message that read: “Googlers have the right to participate in protected concerted activities.” You should get fired…
Did you not read the part where she did, where she followed the process by the book and it was approved? Or did you just have your mind made up to decide to side with Google instead?
The fact that 2 reviewers approved her change doesn't mean that she has the right to send notifications like this through a browser extension.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you not read the part where she did, where she followed the process by the book and it was approved? Or did you just have your mind made up to decide to side with Google instead?
I'm honestly a little surprised (and worried) about all the commenters who argue Google is in the right here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you not read the part where she did, where she followed the process by the book and it was approved? Or did you just have your mind made up to decide to side with Google instead?
I'm honestly a little surprised (and worried) about all the commenters who argue Google is in the right here.
If I got a manager who I was friends with to approve my purchase of a fully decked out $53K Mac Pro so I could finally use Slack at a decent speed when I am working from home, wouldn’t you think there was something fishy?
Did no one read the article? > Spiers, 21, said she went through the standard approval process, which requires two co-workers to greenlight changes, before updating the Chrome browser extension. Another source at Google familiar with the update approval process confirmed to NBC news that those two approvals are standard practice for a browser extension update. She did it exactly according to internal policy. The exte…
That sounds like a code review, which is not the same as project/management approval for the 'feature' at all.
The article is confusing. She says she was fired for doing one thing. Google says she did something else (modified Chromium without permission). Does she deny their claims, or is her statement just spin? Given just her quotes you would think that she was fired for literally telling coworkers that they have a right to organize.
Did you not read the part where she did, where she followed the process by the book and it was approved? Or did you just have your mind made up to decide to side with Google instead?
> Kathryn Spiers, who worked as a security engineer, updated an internal Chrome browser extension so that each time Google employees visited the website of IRI Consultants — the Troy, Michigan, firm that Google hired this year amid a groundswell of labor activism at the company — they would see a pop-up message that read: “Googlers have the right to participate in protected concerted activities.” So basically, the Go…
In this particular case, does Google consistently apply the stated reasoning? Google says it does, the engineer says they don't. Do we just trust Google despite a very long history of corporations taking illegal or unacceptable actions against employees engaging in similar actions, or do we let it go before a court to be decided?
>Kathryn Spiers, who worked as a security engineer, updated an internal Chrome browser extension so that each time Google employees visited the website of IRI Consultants — the Troy, Michigan, firm that Google hired this year amid a groundswell of labor activism at the company — they would see a pop-up message that read: “Googlers have the right to participate in protected concerted activities.” You should get fired…
You either can't read or you're a shill. Sucks you can't delete HN comments huh.