Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize • Hacker News Board

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#271

Post by MrLeap » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:39 PM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #193

CharlesColeman wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know about you, but "Googlers have the right to participate in protected concerted activities." seems pretty political to me. It's about as political as informing someone they have a right to be paid the minimum wage.

Sure you have the right to say it. But you can’t follow me to the bathroom stall and keep telling me. She didn’t post it to a common area. She took it upon herself to plaster it on everyone’s computer screen.

"But you can’t follow me to the bathroom stall and keep telling me."

"plaster it on everyone's screen" did you read the same article I did? The alert was triggered off a single consultancy's site. I really doubt it was a common hang out spot.

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#272

Post by magduf » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:40 PM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #199

dominotw wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

one time i was fired for leaving my computer unlocked to go get some coffee. true story.

Which is pretty dumb. The most important threat to a typical office dev computer is not console access, it's wayward processes and network traffic. What's more secure, a locked console (that protects you from ~1 local people that you know) or something like Little Snitch, which protects you from ~10e6 people you don't know?

It depends on the industry and the company. In some types of government work, it's a very serious security violation.

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#273

Post by TravHatesMe » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:40 PM UTC

vintermann wrote: post #248

TravHatesMe wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a good question. Is this a fireable offense regardless of the content? If not, what kind of content is fireable, subject matter that is political, religious, vulgar, or offensive? Putting this into an internal tool does seem unprofessional in my opinion. Why bite the hand that feeds you?

Why bite the hand that feeds you? Why the struggle, why the strain? Why make trouble, why make scenes? Why go against the grain, why swim upstream? It ain't, it ain't, it ain't no use You're bound, you're bound, you're bound to lose What's done, what's done, what's done is done That's the way the river runs So why get wet? Why break a sweat? Why waste your precious breath? Why beat your handsome brow? Nothing changes…

I like this. Where is it from?

In response to it: You can't apply this to everything, you need to pick you battles. There might be better means to an end.

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#274

Post by justinmchase » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:40 PM UTC

cj wrote: post #5

> 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…

Wouldn't she have had to make a pull request? Since when can't a developer make a controlled change to code?

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#275

Post by jefftk » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:40 PM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #182

jefftk wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> She did it exactly according to internal policy. I don't think this person or the other organizers should have been fired, but code review is not the same as organizational approval. (Disclosure: I work at Google, speaking only for myself)

What is the purview of a code review? Is it only about making sure the code meets technical standards, or are reviewers expected to comment holistically?

Reviewers are supposed to review holistically, and in cases where something raises larger questions (do we actually have approval for this change?) they shouldn't approve until those questions are resolved.

In this case I suspect the reviewers were supportive of the protest, and so approved it even though their authority didn't cover this kind of change.

I don't think any of these people should have been fired, but "by the book" is not a good way of characterizing this process. That would have been proposing the feature to management, getting their sign-off, and then making the code changes.

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#276

Post by raxxorrax » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:40 PM UTC

extropy wrote: post #230

raxxorrax wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they really fired her for just this bagatelle, it speaks more against Google. I don't know why there is this pervasive desire to strangle developers. This is a pretty recent phenomena in my opinion and certainly nothing close to a requirement to develop great software. If I were an employee at Google, actions such as this would let me seriously consider to look for other work. The requirement for the code review f…

Google needs to choose between two evils here: Give employees power / freedom and fire fast if you do stupid things. Stricter regulations/ checks so they cannot mess up hard in the first place. At the cost of slower pace and less risks taken. Google has historically been the former. And it comes with people doing stupid things and getting fired. Just the world is not used for huge companies to keep operating in such…

True that the former strategy requires more responsibility from employees. In larger companies you have more opportunity for your behavior not being penalized, so many companies increase strictness of processes.

But I fail to see how the employee in question did something that justifies firing her. Maybe there are other factors involved, but I certainly think that people opting for getting rid of her only on the basis of publicly available information shouldn't have any form of responsibility for staff to be honest.

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#277

Post by macspoofing » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:42 PM UTC

ones_and_zeros wrote: post #262

dmix wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly what does union activism have to do with security and privacy of potentially dangerous websites? I’m surprised how many people are jumping through hoops to defend this sort of thing.

If the message was "I baked cookies, come by my office if you'd like to try some" do you think this person would similarly be fired? A person that was recently promoted, was designated as a high performer, (and I have nothing to back this up but seemed strategically recruited since they did not fit the google mould as a high school drop out?) I think a reasonable reaction would be to remove the message from the exten…

>If the message was "I baked cookies, come by my office if you'd like to try some" do you think this person would similarly be fired?

Yes I do. 100%.

>put in place a better review process,

This is your solution? The process was intentionally lax so that you wouldn't have too much red-tape when soliciting contributions. The assumption was that this wouldn't be abused by your Security engineers(!!). Your solution to this is to make the process more onerous because one individual couldn't behave like an adult? How about you keep the process as is and you fire the individual who couldn't differentiate activism from security work.

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#278

Post by ce4 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:42 PM UTC

dkersten wrote: post #237

qaq wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know 0 large companies who would tolerate what you just described from a security team member.

She’s young and probably a bit naive. I think it’s absolutely a reprimand-worthy offence, and I certainly understand that a security engineer maybe shouldn’t inject code like she did, but that’s why there are reviewers, but they ok’d it. I don’t think it’s something she should have been fired over. I made dumb mistakes early in my career too, after all. Should she have done it? No, absolutely not. Not like that anywa…

Different viewing angle needed but Google does similar stuff themselves, e.g:

    On Google.com if you present a Vivaldi user agent and arrive via a redirect, the search text box will be misaligned
    On Google Docs if you present a Vivaldi user agent you will receive a warning

https://vivaldi.com/de/blog/user-agent-changes/

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#279

Post by throwaway2048 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:42 PM UTC

mindcrime wrote: post #195

Maxion wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like a lot of astro-turfing going on here. Why would any sane person be against unions?

Why would any sane person be against unions? Because they, like any other organization, tend to become corrupt and exercise their power to the benefit of the "party insiders", at the expense of the everyday member. And I, for one, don't feel any need to have my pay rate negotiated based on some group average or least common denominator. And union dues. I personally fully support the right of people to bargain collect…

The problem with your point of view is that it applies equally to the companies that hire you, and they have very little incentive to be on your side.

Re: Engineer says Google fired her for notifying co-workers of right to organize

#280

Post by tomp » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:43 PM UTC

Maxion wrote: post #64

CodeMage wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read what the extension is for?

It feels like a lot of astro-turfing going on here. Why would any sane person be against unions?

I strongly oppose public unions.

Unions are good for private companies, as there is a balance of powers - if the owners pay employees too little, employees quit, whereas if the employees protest too much, the company doesn't sell anything - both scenarios lead to collapse / bankrupcy, so both sides are motivated to cooperate and find a compromise.

In public services, there is no such balance - the state isn't constrained by market forces, and it won't collapse no matter how much employees protest. In addition, state employment usually comes with other benefits (e.g. job & pension security), so really the employees shouldn't be complaining and holding the whole country hostage.