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

Post by dlp211 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 9:22 PM UTC

dokein wrote: post #667

shadowgovt wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Googlers are encouraged---well, in the past, have been encouraged---to consider themselves capable of making judgement calls like this one. That having been said, this would still be considered an unusual call to have made. But had I been on the receiving end of this message, I suspect I'd have found it annoying unless she remembered to suppress it after first display---if she had, I wouldn't have been bothered by it…

Part of being encouraged to exercise personal judgment is being responsible enough to participate in the consequences. Judgment with no/few personal consequences is reserved for children and legislators.

Post by sam0x17 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 9:29 PM UTC

mcrad wrote: post #516

Basically an intern. Zero engineering credentials despite the title. OMG.

Post by jonas21 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 9:33 PM UTC

SilasX wrote: post #642

scarmig wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, let's walk through the reasoning here. Data is simultaneously Google's greatest strength and its biggest liability. If an employee uploads data to a not-known-to-be-secure third party, it can literally cost Google billions of dollars depending on the data locality. Or, it could plausibly cause a severe security breach (if e.g. an employee uploads a security token into a third party decoder). And so the security t…

Agreed -- so under my rubric, if Google were consistently firing people for all off-topic messages slipped into the security UX, then that would be a non-political firing. But if they came down harder on "oh don't forget NLRB" than "Happy Birthday, Sundar", then that seems political and "fired for notifying co-workers..." seems accurate. (I don't know enough of the history of Google's firings and this kind of violati…

Post by scarface74 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 9:39 PM UTC

CharlesColeman wrote: post #597

scarface74 wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is she part of the company’s legal team?

> Is she part of the company’s legal team? If that's was an actual requirement, can you make or point to a statement in an official Google capacity that states the notices displayed by the tool she maintained had to be written or pre-cleared by Google's legal team? If you can, was the requirement for legal team involvement established practice and not some post-hoc rationalization for her firing?

Post by scarface74 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 9:50 PM UTC

ixtli wrote: post #612

scarface74 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there have been plenty of stories about toxic managers in tech companies. If your manager said it was okay to hit on your coworker does that absolve your responsibility to have good judgement? And as far as having “bargaining power” they are tech workers at Google. If they have even a modicum of skills they have the ultimate power - they can walk away and get another job. Heck, I’ve worked at a bunch of no name…

A single employee walking away has no power to change the status quo at google. A lot of them, however, do. That's what google and all employers wants to crush before it has a chance to coalesce.