101–110 of 282 posts
I just want to say, for every person in disgust of Uber and their sexual harassment scenario, there are many more of us that just don't care. Of course, most that don't care don't comment. So the comment section is not a good view of public opinion. Just the vocal minority.
Dang went through and banned a lot of accounts for posts like this yesterday. Heads up.
The article doesn't discuss the seniority of the fired employees. It's very hard to distinguish between scapegoating and actually working to fix the problem without that information. The problem with Uber isn't that some employees engage in sexual harassment. The problem is that there's a culture where sexual harassment isn't taken seriously, is tolerated if the perpetrators are "high performing" in other respects, a…
It's probably important to consider that even with those numbers, you wouldn't know whether it was scapegoating or not. All they would do would be to allow you to make assumptions, which is more about your preconceptions of what you think they should find than the facts.
> The problem with Uber isn't that some employees engage in sexual harassment. The problem is that there's a culture where sexual harassment isn't taken seriously, is tolerated if the perpetrators are "high performing"...
See, this may be true, but we don't know this. The point of an investigation is to find this out. Since the investigation in question here is internal, and I'd hazard that most of us don't necessarily harbor any hope that an entirely truthful response will come out of it (I for one wouldn't really expect that from a company I thought was more responsible than Uber), but that doesn't mean we should act like probabilities (and probabilities that are rooted in human behavior that is understood to any statistical degree by almost anyone in my opinion), we should be careful about the certainty we represent those outcomes.
In other words, it's all a big swirling mess of hearsay at this point. The problem could be fairly localized but widely publicized, or much more widespread as you state. We don't really know.
I just want to say, for every person in disgust of Uber and their sexual harassment scenario, there are many more of us that just don't care. Of course, most that don't care don't comment. So the comment section is not a good view of public opinion. Just the vocal minority.
Feels somewhat symbolic at this point. The massively corrupt shop decides to fire a bunch of people who max out the acceptable level of corruption. Even how they hired Holder feels like a PR tactic; a man who was against all the US torture techniques ( http://fightthefuture.org/articles/the-rescue-of-eric-holder... ) and yet prosecuted no one. He is the image of a career, PR frontman. I'm still going to take Lyft ove…
Firing 2 or 3 people might be symbolic. Firing >20 isn't.
But who knows, maybe it's the correct amount of people. But I can sorta understand it coming off as almost symbolic due to the low number.
I remember when these were called "witch-hunts", not "probes". How progressive we are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope. I don't need to be to have a conversation. Of course, you could argue the person I was speaking with shouldn't have shared the information with me, but that's their concern.
We have no way of independently verifying your claim.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should be able to do both with far fewer than 12,000 people. I suspect that the bulk of those people are doing something else.
Well, no one's stopping you from starting a competitor. Since you can do it with far fewer people, you should be profitable in no time. Good luck!
Could I do it with fewer people? Maybe, maybe not. Could I do it with fewer than 12,000 people writing the app and maintaining the backend? Absolutely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Seems risky to hire a recent Uber employee at this point because bringing a toxic sexist into the company can inflict massive damage. Jesus. They are still people. You want to ostracize them from all society and prevent them from earning a living in their chosen career? 'Sexual harassment' is also a catch-all term that can encompass all kinds of actions. It could involve a clueless, inexperienced 20-something asking…
I have independently verified Susan Fowler's claim that her management chain didn't treat her case seriously. And by that I mean with a member of her management chain. If an entire chain of management and HR don't treat a claim like that seriously (no one has disputed the claim), there is absolutely a cultural problem.
I never doubted her account. But it is anecdotal, and you can't extrapolate her singular experience to the entire company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll help solve the paradox. "Don't care" can refer to at least 3 things: 1. don't care that there is sexual harassment at Uber 2. don't care about sexual harassment like that occurred at Uber 3. don't care that other people think most people care My comment is about those that check off all 3. They are the majority, and they don't comment. For me, I only check off #1 and #2, hence the comment.
Risky move.
Does it make having "Uber" in your Career Profile look bad now? Even if someone wants to genuinely switch job within next few month out of Uber, It would raise eyebrows at next interview table. So Uber gonna have very mall attrition rate now. Every action has both side of coin. :)