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

Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 183 posts

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#131

Post by manfredo »

filmgirlcw wrote: post #55
manfredo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To sweep something under the rug means to ignore it and not deal with it. Google did deal with it, so it's incorrect to say that the accusation was swept under the rug. Sure, you may be displeased at how they handled it but there's no denial of the fact that they did take the accusations seriously and fired a high level exec. You're ignoring the damage cause by the optics of such a lawsuit. Google being known as the…

>You're ignoring the damage cause by the optics of such a lawsuit. Google being known as the company that used an allegation of harassment to try and cheat an exec out of his outstanding compensation would be atrocious for the company's image That's not the case with Matt Lauer at NBC. Lauer sued and NBC has continued to fight back. It's also not the case with Les Moonves at CBS (the CBS situation is much more compli…

> People who come forward almost always lose in very tangible ways -- even if they win. That's why coming forward is so difficult and why those that do are so incredibly brave.

I agree. The point is, refusing to pay Rubin and going to trial would have made the victim lose even more. She'd lose her privacy, for one. And if the case is lost she may lose her reputation and live the rest of her life branded as a false accuser.

Do you know if the accuser wanted to go to trial? If not then we have no business talking about how Google didn't act with the victim's interest in mind.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#133

Post by lawnchair_larry »

matt4077 wrote: post #118
tw04 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No, he coerced them into it - if you have a position of power, and you say "have sex with me", effectively in exchange for your treatment/employment in the company Unless you've got info beyond what was in the times report, you're making a TON of assumptions about the nature of the relationship. As I said, it's wrong and he should be fired for having relations with a subordinate no matter what the circumstances were…

Is there something you enjoy about explicit stories of sexual assault and coercion that would make you want to force victims to see the intimate details of their trauma published for all to see? Because that seems to go somewhat beyond the usual standard. And it wouldn't even be helpful, unless you follow it up with a demand of DNA samples and expert witnesses. FWIW: the parent comment wasn't assuming anything–they j…

The problem is that none of that is even alleged to have happened. The burning man guy was not Andy Rubin. According to the report, the coercion bit was from a woman he had a multi-year consensual affair with, after she decided to break up with him. So, it is not that simple.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#134

Post by leereeves »

lovich wrote: post #117
leereeves wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What good is a society without due process or presumption of innocence, where a disputed allegation would be punished without proof?

Do companies apply any of that to employees unless they are a protected class? If they want you gone you're gone for whatever reason they make up if they even make one. You don't get to have a presumption of innocence or due process. Why shouldnt companies be treated the same way by their employees?

I think we'd all like to see contracts meant to prevent those abuses honored. It's only unfortunate that more of us don't have such contracts.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#135

Post by leereeves »

jacquesm wrote: post #127
leereeves wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What good is a society without due process or presumption of innocence, where a disputed allegation would be punished without proof?

That's not a court. It's a company. And just like they can decide to hand out golden parachutes to execs accused of misbehaving they could chose not to. That's not the same as punishment by a court of law after 'due process'.

I thought the $90 million was required by a contract. If not, and Google made the decision to offer the money after the accusation, that's different.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#136

Post by tw04 »

vkou wrote: post #110
tw04 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"The suit included a screenshot of an August 2015 email Mr. Rubin sent to one woman. “You will be happy being taken care of,” he wrote. “Being owned is kinda like you are my property, and I can loan you to other people.”" I don't understand why Americans are so concerned with what happens in somebody else's bedroom. I don't give a single flying f about what two consenting adults decide to do in a bedroom. There are…

> Otherwise - why do you care? It's none of your business. When your boss is sleeping with one of your co-workers, how do you know that they are not in a quid-pro-quo relationship? This isn't an American thing - this is a workplace thing. If you're a manager, there's seven billion other people in the world, who don't report to you. You'll probably find your soulmate, or whatever the hell you're looking for - outside…

>When your boss is sleeping with one of your co-workers, how do you know that they are not in a quid-pro-quo relationship?

And as I've said in just about every post I've made, he should've been fired for sleeping with a subordinate. There are countless reasons that's not OK. I was responding to and quite obviously referring to the guy making a big deal about him telling someone he "owns them" - or whatever terminology he used. Do I think that's disgusting? Sure. But that's between him and whomever he has that relationship with. If she's consenting and willing, so be it, not my place to judge.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#137

Post by asianthrowaway »

tw04 wrote: post #96
asianthrowaway wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The burning man guy is another guy (who still works at Google afaik). This Rubin guy was no doubt a creep. From the NYT article: "The suit included a screenshot of an August 2015 email Mr. Rubin sent to one woman. “You will be happy being taken care of,” he wrote. “Being owned is kinda like you are my property, and I can loan you to other people.”" Yikes!

>"The suit included a screenshot of an August 2015 email Mr. Rubin sent to one woman. “You will be happy being taken care of,” he wrote. “Being owned is kinda like you are my property, and I can loan you to other people.”" I don't understand why Americans are so concerned with what happens in somebody else's bedroom. I don't give a single flying f about what two consenting adults decide to do in a bedroom. There are…

First off, why do you assume I am american? And my point is that this kink of his, which involves dominating and "owning" his employees, should raise alarm bells considering the accusations levied against him.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#138

Post by jacquesm »

leereeves wrote: post #135
jacquesm wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a court. It's a company. And just like they can decide to hand out golden parachutes to execs accused of misbehaving they could chose not to. That's not the same as punishment by a court of law after 'due process'.

I thought the $90 million was required by a contract. If not, and Google made the decision to offer the money after the accusation, that's different.

(1) it depends on what else was in the contract, I haven't seen the contract but 'being fired for cause' usually triggers a whole pile of clauses that have serious consequences.

and

(2) Google went on to invest in his new venture, which I highly doubt was in the contract no matter when the whole thing went down.

As it is one arm of Google decided to let the man go for cause and give him a golden parachute, and another arm of the company decided to invest in his next venture.

Neither of those read like something bad happening to Andy Rubin. You could fire me any day for any reason you'd like to pick if you gave me 90 million.

Re: Google Engineers Organizing a Walk Out to Protest the Protection of Andy Rubin

#139

Post by DoreenMichele »

tw04 wrote: post #96
asianthrowaway wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The burning man guy is another guy (who still works at Google afaik). This Rubin guy was no doubt a creep. From the NYT article: "The suit included a screenshot of an August 2015 email Mr. Rubin sent to one woman. “You will be happy being taken care of,” he wrote. “Being owned is kinda like you are my property, and I can loan you to other people.”" Yikes!

>"The suit included a screenshot of an August 2015 email Mr. Rubin sent to one woman. “You will be happy being taken care of,” he wrote. “Being owned is kinda like you are my property, and I can loan you to other people.”" I don't understand why Americans are so concerned with what happens in somebody else's bedroom. I don't give a single flying f about what two consenting adults decide to do in a bedroom. There are…

Though I can't find the exact context at the moment, I believe that was from his divorce. Most of the world seems to think it is your spouse's concern whom else you get involved with, both for health reasons and financial ones.
Post reply on HN