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

Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 368 posts

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#211

Post by jedimastert »

yowlingcat wrote: post #48

I didn't expect to agree with Facebook corporate but here I am. It's one thing to privately disagree with a coworker about their action or lack thereof with respect to a contemporary event. But to drag it into a public setting is a severe violation of boundaries and borderline harassment. It's a huge liability risk to FB -- to scold your colleagues in public for their desire to separate the political from the profess…

> borderline harassment

Possibly personal opinion here, but given the current charged (understatement) political environment and twitter's propensity for "scarlet lettering" people via mob harassment, I don't think this was borderline. This seems like a deliberate attempt to get a large group of people to harass a co-worker because of differing opinions about how and when to communicate political opinions.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#212

Post by NonEUCitizen »

mgleitub wrote: post #16
nsainsbury wrote: post #4

I think a key phrase here is "he was dismissed for publicly challenging a colleague’s silence". In other words, he publicly harassed a colleague who (for what could be any number of perfectly valid reasons) preferred not to publicly state their beliefs. That would seem to me to be an eminently reasonable reason to fire someone. If you go around publicly harassing your colleagues to publicly state their political opin…

Indeed -- here is some additional context that the article doesn't provide: The fired employee Tweeted today: >In the interest of transparency, I was let go for calling out an employee’s inaction here on Twitter. I stand by what I said. They didn’t give me the chance to quit [0] He then specifically cited [1] the Tweet in question that was the cause: >I asked @Vjeux to follow @reactjs's lead and add a statement of su…

Why push for a statement on Recoil docs instead of on the front page of FB?

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#215

Post by icelancer »

baddox wrote: post #64
PiggySpeed wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm starting a new job soon and I'm trying to figure out how I'll handle these "silence is complicit" characters. My personal policy is to not discuss political/social issues at work.

If you think that it's not true (that silence is not complicit), then shouldn't you attempt to explain that?

>> If you think that it's not true (that silence is not complicit), then shouldn't you attempt to explain that?

You aren't entitled to a conversation.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#216

Post by guerrilla »

_b3dj wrote: post #30

> “Intentionally not making a statement is already political,” Dale wrote in the tweet No it’s not. And this reminds me of the Dictatorship of the small minority [0] from NN Taleb. There are small intolerant minorities who are extremely vocal on certain matters to the point their opinions resemble a dictatorship [0] https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...

Assuming no mitigating circumstances for not speaking out, it literally is acceptance and tacit perpetuation of the status quo which is most certainly political.

I'm not saying there were no mitigating circumstances nor condoning the person's behavior but they are clearly correct on that specific point.

"It's not the violence of the few that scares me, it's the silence of the many." Martin Luther King, Jr.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#217

Post by austhrow743 »

whymauri wrote: post #204
dvtrn wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kill em with kindness. “Thanks for letting me know how you feel about this, I consider this a valuable opinion and think deeply on it”. Then go ahead and do whatever you were going to do anyway, but at least let them know you’ve heard and acknowledged what they had to say. Sometimes folks just want to be acknowledged, that doesn’t seem like too much of a burden.

But do you actually acknowledge them? I think this is fine if you're taking it to heart and actually internalizing the discussion a bit. Otherwise, it's disingenuous. Edit: this is very basic EQ and active listening, not sure why it's controversial to have good social skills.

If you want genuine don't ask people questions where the answer can give them negative backlash at work.

Getting upset when someone wont be truthful on things with you on touchy subjects at work is like being upset when someone wont be truthful with you on touchy subjects when you're pointing a gun at them.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#218

Post by chipotle_coyote »

dekhn wrote: post #101
majormajor wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the Senate? The Senate results in huge vote power discrepancies.

Power discrepancies and mob rule are different things. [edit: though it's correct that the Senate, like the EC, is not "popular", as every state has two senators, rather than a proportionate amount, like representatives]

That point in your edit is actually a pretty big deal. We're already in a situation where a majority of the Senate represents less than 20% of the country's population. Some people will (correctly) retort that the Senate was never intended to be popular in the way you used the word, but -- just like the Electoral College -- the significant concentration of population in urban areas is something that the founders almost certainly didn't foresee.

While "mob rule" may be an unfair term, not only did more people vote for the Democratic presidential candidate in 2016, there have been more votes cast for Democrats than Republicans as a whole not only in Senate races over the last decade but in House races, too -- the Republican majority there is protected by gerrymandering.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#219

Post by stonogo »

Grimm1 wrote: post #50
mgleitub wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed -- here is some additional context that the article doesn't provide: The fired employee Tweeted today: >In the interest of transparency, I was let go for calling out an employee’s inaction here on Twitter. I stand by what I said. They didn’t give me the chance to quit [0] He then specifically cited [1] the Tweet in question that was the cause: >I asked @Vjeux to follow @reactjs's lead and add a statement of su…

Politics should be kept out of the workplace.

Maybe the workplace should stop spending millions of dollars a quarter on political lobbying, then.

Re: Facebook fires employee for publicly scolding a colleague

#220

Post by fault_lines »

scarmig wrote: post #145
bsamuels wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first few replies are even more telling. When someone tells him that calling out a coworker is in bad taste, you get this gem >oh no Arthur thinks I'm rude, how will I recover https://twitter.com/aweary/status/1267927023596400642?s=20

I love that in, another Tweet, someone is giving Arthur shit for... not having his pronouns in his bio. ETA: apparently the user giving Arthur shit is just trolling

[flagged]
Post reply on HN