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

Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 405 posts

Re: Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

#271

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

krapp wrote: post #269
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 1) conservatives rarely bother to speak up on HN; they know they are quite unwelcome here and 2) the illiberal left claims to be allied with liberals and that's clearly false.

Conservatives speak up all the time on HN, and weirdly enough they sound exactly like you do, down to the inability to refer to the left without a pejorative.

Conservatives ignorantly tend to refer to everything to the left of them as "liberals" even to behavior that is quite illiberal, so the distinction is important. But you're welcome to believe whatever you wish; it's a free country.

Re: Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

#272

Post by gklitz »

worried4future wrote: post #9

The meat of it is here: > Google “retaliated against approximately 50 employees and interfered with their Section 7 rights by terminating and/or placing them on administrative leave in response to their protected concerted activity, namely, participation (or perceived participation) in a peaceful, non-disruptive protest that was directly and explicitly connected to their terms and conditions of work,” the complaint r…

[flagged]

Re: Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

#273

Post by troffo »

tovej wrote: post #160
siva7 wrote: post #147

> “There’s been a total change in the way Google responds to employees trying to have a voice in their workplace,” the fired software engineer said. “It’s night and day from the Google of even five, 10 years ago.” Having a political voice is different than having a voice against sexual harassment at the workplace. Please don't mix things that don't belong together. Radically expressing your political voice during you…

I feel like I have to push back against the idea that it is "radical" to object to your labor being used in a genocide. Am I the only one that feels like this is a fairly straightforward moral issue, and one I would expect to -- at the very least -- be allowed to express myself about. I also think the resolution of the moral issue is fairly straightforward, but I accept that there will be multiple opinions there. Sti…

[flagged]

Re: Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

#274

Post by tovej »

troffo wrote: post #273
tovej wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like I have to push back against the idea that it is "radical" to object to your labor being used in a genocide. Am I the only one that feels like this is a fairly straightforward moral issue, and one I would expect to -- at the very least -- be allowed to express myself about. I also think the resolution of the moral issue is fairly straightforward, but I accept that there will be multiple opinions there. Sti…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

#275

Post by cogman10 »

bjourne wrote: post #270
cogman10 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The right to free speech is not a right if exercising it costs you your livelihood. This sort of free speech has never existed and frankly it would be preposterous for it to exist. A company couldn't fire a salesperson that went around telling potential customers "Hey, our product is garbage you should use our competitors"? A state employee couldn't be fired for lying to the races they don't like "You don't qualify…

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/straw-man-fallacy/

What is the substantial difference between the speech I listed and the speech you want protected?

Re: Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

#276

Post by smsm42 »

linearrust wrote: post #242

What a difference a few years makes. Top comment here : "Don’t do it at work." Top comment a few years ago : "If you work at Google and you have participated in this protest: Thank you." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17776276 The comments back then were very supportive of google employees protesting against china's censorship. While the top comments here seem to be against google employees protesting israeli w…

I understand in the China case they didn't actually physically occupied workspace and prevented others from doing their work? They wrote a letter. I think there's a bit of a difference between writing a letter and barging into your bosses office and telling them you're not leaving until they do what you want.

Re: Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

#277

Post by tovej »

gataca wrote: post #221
peteradio wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good thing the lawyer brigade is helping Israel stay just just just barely below the technical definition of a genocide. Google can rest easy knowing til this date one apparent body of justice has blessed the actions as not technically genocide. Certainly the employees should continue to keep their heads down and keep calm because so far its not technically genocide. Judgements based on evidence dated til Dec. 2023,…

We are arguing about the meaning of words, especially words thrown around as libels to try and delegitimize justified self defense. I'm sorry if the facts don't agree with your desires for something to be true. War is terrible and civilians die in all wars, especially those in urban areas where one party tunnels underneath civilian infrastructure to protect themselves while leaving civilians exposed to fire.

It is not libel to say that the ICJ's statement is a strong indication that a genocide is ongoing. What Joan Donoghue says is that, technically, there is no ruling on the "plausibility of genocide claims". Which is a technical legal claim separate from the sentiment in the ruling. Yes, the ICJ has not made a ruling on the plausibility because the legal process has not come far enough to make such a ruling.

This does not mean that the ruling does not indicate that the court thinks a genocide is occurring.

If you simply look at the definition of a genocide and the facts on the ground, you should quite easily come to the conclusion that this is a genocide and it should end -- and that Palestinians should have legal rights to live on their indigenous land and have human rights. This is not a radical position in my mind, this should be the status quo of a person with a normative moral compass.

Re: Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

#278

Post by smsm42 »

krapp wrote: post #258
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has the illiberal left not been smugly telling us " Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences " when others lost their jobs? They hardly have any right to complain when they are hoist by their own petard.

OK cool. That doesn't explain why the right - which has been just as smugly insisting that freedom of speech must mean freedom from consequences - doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

Because they have been deliberately excluded from participating in the discussion early on, so the only solace they have is watching the left eat their own. If the right doesn't get freedom, they'd at least enjoy their enemies getting the same treatment. It's a sad bargain but the only one available as it seems.

Re: Google workers fired for protesting Israeli contract file NLRB complaint

#279

Post by nickff »

giraffe_lady wrote: post #262
nickff wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using the process seems like ‘abuse of process’ in cases like this where the protesters clearly violated the law and their obligations to their counterparty (in this case their employer).

Well, whether they did that is not completely clear? That's what the process is there to decide right. But in any case and far more importantly protests have goals they want to achieve and being a pain in the ass is absolutely a valid tactic. Protest movements have rarely accomplished their aims by acting fully within the social preferences of their opponents.

The problem with this logic is that I’m not sure you’d want it applied when the tables are turned. How would you feel if Israel-supporting lawyers started filing frivolous nuisance suits against these protesters? Still fair game?

Keep in mind that these junk suits (in both directions), have negative impacts on other people trying to access the justice system for legitimate reasons.

Post reply on HN