111–120 of 582 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TVCs are W-2 employees of a company, with the relevant taxes paid and benefits present.
Of "a" company but not Google. It's unclear how the benefits of Google and the other company compare. I'd guess not well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Had a similar experience. The recruiting part of the process went pretty smoothly, until I got to the onsite. Had 5 on-site interviews (excluding lunch), all exactly the same format: walk in the room where my interviewer is waiting with a question written on the white board, they say "hello" to me and I'm expected to read the question, clarify it a little bit and start coding. Not a single interviewer cared about my…
(Googler, my opinions are my own, etc) When interviewing we are instructed to write up the interview question and answer and score on a rubric with citations into the interview notes. These notes then go to the hiring committee who makes the decision without knowing the human side at all. I think the point is something like this https://www.theguardian.com/women-in-leadership/2013/oct/14/... where the hiring committe…
This is just one example of a much bigger issue, which is religious institutions quietly taking over secular businesses without anyone realizing it. It is so pervasive and so stealthy that it is hard to even talk about it without sounding like a crackpot. It has become a little more evident recently with the emergence of evangelical Christian activism in politics, but it runs much, much deeper than that. The LDS Chur…
Weren't the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) up until recently owned by the LDS?
I am, however, surprised more companies don't have explicit HR conflict of interest clauses regarding religious entities. Not whole religions, but specific congregations/parishes/etc. Allowing these social networks as unchecked recruiting channels without some sort of control seems like asking for discrimination suits, even when the subject is a traditional religious organization rather than a cult.
I think about religion the same way I think about family. There's nothing wrong with referring your cousin or fellow congregant for a position, but a judicious company should probably flag the conflict of interest in the actual hiring process and perhaps also in management relationships. Otherwise you can end up with centers of influence in the company revolving around an external religious social network, which is a huge risk for the company.
(Alumni networks have the same issue in terms of institutional political dysfunction, but with the important difference that a company cannot be sued for preferring Stanford grads in promotions.)
This is just one example of a much bigger issue, which is religious institutions quietly taking over secular businesses without anyone realizing it. It is so pervasive and so stealthy that it is hard to even talk about it without sounding like a crackpot. It has become a little more evident recently with the emergence of evangelical Christian activism in politics, but it runs much, much deeper than that. The LDS Chur…
> It is so pervasive and so stealthy that it is hard to even talk about it without sounding like a crackpot You're sitting in the intersection of 'it's pervasive', 'nobody is noticing it', and not listing the evidence for it. So yeah, it sounds crackpotty. > It has become a little more evident recently with the emergence of evangelical Christian activism in politics Christians, evangelical or otherwise, have been gen…
With regards to the LDS church, this is well-known and well-documented. Here's just one easily-found link:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/photo-essays/2012-07-12/the-m...
Here are some links about the more general problem:
https://www.businessinsider.com/18-extremely-religious-big-a...
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/religion-bigger-busin...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you read the article, the cult's also been involved in what's arguably sex trafficking. The author wasn't personally harmed in a significant way but I don't see how that's relevant.
Why sue if you haven't been harmed? "I was fired from my team there in February of 2021 because I raised alarm about a cult within Google, a group called the Fellowship of Friends. " Sounds to me like he freaked out because he was working with weirdos, wanted 'someone to do something about it', and then wouldn't let it go.
He may not have been harmed by the cult members, but he was (again, allegedly) harmed by the culture created by this cult. "I learned of someone being discriminated due to their religious beliefs (or lack of), I reported it and the company fired me" makes a good case for the company supporting and/or engaging in religious discrimination.
I'm not saying the author will win - it is entirely possible, like you say, that he was fired for being disruptive or other hundred valid reasons. But I do think the author raises at least a good initial argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please do not take HN threads into religious flamewar. This is a classic generic flamewar tangent, exactly the sort of thing the site guidelines ask you not to do here. If you'd please review them and stick to the rules, we'd appreciate it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: you've been posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to other threads to. Could you please stop? We ban accounts that…
Caste discrimination is definitely a thing. HN has had numerous articles about this. https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+... reports 2400 links, since algolia is down for maintenance. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cisco-lawsuit/california-... is one of the bigger articles about Caste-based discrimination. Google also cancelled a talk over this topic as well. https://www.washingtonpost.com…
That has nothing to do with the GP comment being religious flamebait and therefore against the site guidelines, which it obviously was.
I understand the internet forum instinct to look for specialized nefarious secret reasons when a standard moderation decision gets made, but really.