I don't know if this was just the culture and influence from Kalanick, but Uber all around seems like a terrible company. Tehy cover up data breaches, they lie to regulators when they test their self driving cars, they act passively when women get harassed on their watch. I haven't worked there but from the outside it seems pretty much "do whatever you want, but don't get caught".
Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
181–190 of 216 posts
Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
This aphorism that HR is there to protect the company -- I hear it all the time and it's terribly cynical, while also probably true. Why must it be this way; asked another way, why do we accept that it must be this way, that every time we engage HR it must be with the understanding that they are the adversary. Why go to HR at all, why even have HR, why not fold it all in the legal counsel's office? Why can't HR be wh…
"Why must it be this way[?]" Follow the money. I don't mean that as snark; I'm serious. I think people in general don't follow the money enough. Even some people who occasionally advocate for it are very selective about it and frequently just treat it as a slur to deploy sometimes. But it's more important than that. It should always be part of the analysis of a business. If you aren't paying for it, you aren't the be…
It's a matter of legal accountability. If companies get away with defending the harassers, then that's what the cynical ones will do. Only if they get punished when they handle sexual harassment cases badly, will they start handling them better. Companies should be liable for extra damages in sexual harassment cases when it turns out they have a history of protecting the harassers. And maybe punish the individuals involved in protecting the harassers.
Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
plays worlds tiniest violin I am truly speechless. Later HN, its been good.
I'm just trying to find a way to stay alive. I don't understand why I get so much hate for that. I can't take care of the oppression other minorities face. I can't even take care of myself.
[deleted]
Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
This response has to be the most aggressive misreading of privilege I've encountered in a while. Privilege IS NOT a system where everyone in a group gets better outcomes than another group. It IS NOT a system in which everyone in a group even receives all of the benefits of privilege. Yet it does describe systematic power imbalances that cause the majority of members in a group to receive benefits or the lack of oppr…
When discussing universal statements, counterexamples are arguably useful. More importantly, though, I think we're all dealt a huge hand of cards--many at birth, some later--some beneficial, some deleterious. In a form of social bikeshedding, we tend to concentrate on things like race and gender because they're obvious. It's far from clear, though, that they constitute more than a tiny fraction of the cards that matt…
> It's far from clear, though, that they constitute more than a tiny fraction of the cards that matter.
This isn't true. Take any intersection and add minority status and you'll see increased poverty, reduced college attendance, increased arrest rate etc. There may be other cards but none so universally an issue as the continued disadvantages faced by POC in the USA. Sure other issues exist, but saying that while people are discussing racism is the equivalent of walking into a San Jose city council meeting and asking "what have YOU done for the city of Hollister today?"
> I prefer to deal with each person as an individual.
As is the only rational way to go about interpersonal interactions. You aren't America, you aren't Every Hiring Manager, you aren't Every Cop.
Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
Complaining about identity politics is a big way white men practice identity politics, Charles. When there's a problem, refusing to let people talk about the problem becomes part of the problem.
What makes you think it's ok to make wide, sweeping generalizations about how people of a certain race and gender think and how do you think that doesn't constitute racism?
As stated before, pointing out and having a clear and honest dialog about racism isn't in itself racism.
That, and white people can't experience racism. They may at some point in their lives be discriminated against based on their race, unlikely though it is and extremely unlikely it'll be in some massively detrimental way. But, that's not racism.
Also, "wide sweeping generalizations about how people of a certain race and gender" is a mischaracterization of what's happening. In the Charlottesville example, white supremacists set out to do what they do by the very definition of their organization - oppress non whites. There is no sweeping generalization there. If they weren't out to oppress non whites, they wouldn't be white supremacists lol.
Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you think it's ok to make wide, sweeping generalizations about how people of a certain race and gender think and how do you think that doesn't constitute racism?
As stated before, pointing out and having a clear and honest dialog about racism isn't in itself racism. That, and white people can't experience racism. They may at some point in their lives be discriminated against based on their race, unlikely though it is and extremely unlikely it'll be in some massively detrimental way. But, that's not racism. Also, "wide sweeping generalizations about how people of a certain rac…
> That, and white people can't experience racism. They may at some point in their lives be discriminated against based on their race, unlikely though it is and extremely unlikely it'll be in some massively detrimental way. But, that's not racism.
That is some insane mental gymnastics... https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
plays worlds tiniest violin I am truly speechless. Later HN, its been good.
I'm just trying to find a way to stay alive. I don't understand why I get so much hate for that. I can't take care of the oppression other minorities face. I can't even take care of myself.
wbronitsky's comment was horrible, yet exemplary of so much. I, on the other hand, wish you the very best of luck.
Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I do agree about the jackets thing being sexist, I would like to point out that this isn't always a man vs. woman thing. At my current company, they like to buy corporate-branded clothing for employees too. T-shirts, polo shirts, and sweatshirts/hoodies are what they normally get. The last time they got some shirts, I went to go get some, and they were all in L, XL, and XXL sizes. I'm a tall guy, but I'm slim a…
The way I read it, they actually had all the employees try on jackets and ordered them for each employee, except they turned around and didn't order female jackets because they didn't meet a minimum order size. That's quite a bit different than ordering a batch of jackets in some array of sizes and hoping most people can find one that fits. That's still a bit shitty, but not nearly as shitty as above. I'll also note…
>Of course none of the above is as shitty as the government agency my neighbor works at that asked the female employees to serve cocktails at a winter social.
Wow, that's amazing. I wonder which agency this was, and if this is new for this agency or if they were doing this kind of thing before 2016. It sounds like excellent grounds for a lawsuit.
Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Why must it be this way[?]" Follow the money. I don't mean that as snark; I'm serious. I think people in general don't follow the money enough. Even some people who occasionally advocate for it are very selective about it and frequently just treat it as a slur to deploy sometimes. But it's more important than that. It should always be part of the analysis of a business. If you aren't paying for it, you aren't the be…
It's a matter of legal accountability. If companies get away with defending the harassers, then that's what the cynical ones will do. Only if they get punished when they handle sexual harassment cases badly, will they start handling them better. Companies should be liable for extra damages in sexual harassment cases when it turns out they have a history of protecting the harassers. And maybe punish the individuals in…
Exactly: it's all about money, and also individual consequences to HR staff themselves. If the company stood to lose lots of money to bad behavior, then they would police it much better. But they don't, so they don't. Instead, it would be hazardous to their own careers if they disciplined or canned people that the upper management favored (due to cronyism), so they protect those people as long as it doesn't cost the company too much.
People really need to get past this idea that HR is there to protect employees. They are NOT your friends.
Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber
#190>“I felt a wave of relief wash over me when I remembered that I worked at a large company, one with a sizable human resources department,” I feel like someone needs to run an education campaign on what HR is and who it works for. HR is there to protect the business. They aren't there as some moral arbiter. If you reported sexual harassment to HR you are going to be part of an equation - is it better for the business…
> someone needs to run an education campaign on what HR is and who it works for. HR is there to protect the business What I still don't understand is why the uber HR acted this way. I think people understand that HR is there for the company, but the assumption is that they want to avoid any bad press. If they protect a person who is a multiple offender. And this person is not C*E or high ranking manager, just a regul…
>I totally don't get how on earth protecting a "high performer" and sexual offender is good for the business.
It probably isn't, in the long run, but it IS good for the HR chief's career to keep the executives happy, and the "high performing" sexual predator is probably a good buddy of the executives. And as for the good of the business, why should the executives care about that (in the long run)? As long as it performs well for the next few years, that's good enough, because the executives will move on by then.