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

Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#161

Post by halostatue »

mvdwoord wrote: post #61
zorpner wrote: post #25

Good. I get that HN is not into this, but this employee stated, bluntly, that they don't believe many of their colleagues should be there because of their sex. Every peer review, every no-hire, every interaction , is and should be suspect. Happy where I am now, but future interviews will include me asking what management would do about this, and termination is the only correct answer. This is textbook hostile environ…

So you're going to ask management what they are going to do about someone who is stating well accepted scientific facts [1]? I hope we never become colleagues. [1] http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-...

It’s pretty easy to find at least one scientist who will deny global warming, or that smoking doesn’t cause cancer. That doesn’t make that scientist right any more than these (all male, all white) scientists.

The assertions of the author of the screed are not well-accepted, and they are not facts. They are conjecture, and the author attempted to make universals out of primarily American ways of thinking and ingrained ways of discrimination.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#162

Post by toufka »

tptacek wrote: post #20
sna1l wrote: post #5

Not a lawyer, but will he have a case to sue for wrongful termination? I guess without seeing the employee contract and Code of Conduct, it is hard to say.

Unless the Google contract departs from boilerplate California employment contracts in ways highly disadvantageous to one of the largest, most legally savvy firms in the state, it is unlikely that Google needs a documented reason to fire anybody, so long as they aren't retaliating against them for concrete protected concerted actions in labor organization or retaliating against them for defending their rights as a pr…

At least one California lawyer thinks that this kind of firing over a call for a change in labor practices is illegal:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/07/it-may-be-illegal-for-google...

> First, federal labor law bars even non-union employers like Google from punishing an employee for communicating with fellow employees about improving working conditions.

> Second... California law prohibits employers from threatening to fire employees to get them to adopt or refrain from adopting a particular political course of action.

> Third, the engineer complained in parts of his memo about company policies that he believes violate employment discrimination laws... It is unlawful for an employer to discipline an employee for challenging conduct that the employee reasonably believed to be discriminatory, even when a court later determines the conduct was not actually prohibited by the discrimination laws.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#163

Post by mzw_mzw »

tptacek wrote: post #110
wildmusings wrote: post #35

The author's arguments have been completely misrepresented. He pointed out widely-believed and sometimes scientifically-established differences in the DISTRIBUTION OF traits in men and women. He said that those differences make attempts to achieve numerical parity misguided, discriminatory, and harmful. What is his conclusion about how we should behave? "Treat people as individuals, not as just another member of thei…

What else is the American mind unfairly closed to? Why is "women are, in the the large, excepting some outliers, biologically disfavored to become programmers" the threshold issue? What else should we be more open-minded about? We're also very closed-minded about: * Child labor * The facially legitimate grievances of Al Qaeda * Universal suffrage * The illegality of marital rape Does it just happen that this particul…

Do you think that saying "more men than women are interested in software development" is as evil as child labor, al Qaeda terrorism, restricting the vote, or legalizing rape?

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#164

Post by harryh »

tptacek wrote: post #20
sna1l wrote: post #5

Not a lawyer, but will he have a case to sue for wrongful termination? I guess without seeing the employee contract and Code of Conduct, it is hard to say.

Unless the Google contract departs from boilerplate California employment contracts in ways highly disadvantageous to one of the largest, most legally savvy firms in the state, it is unlikely that Google needs a documented reason to fire anybody, so long as they aren't retaliating against them for concrete protected concerted actions in labor organization or retaliating against them for defending their rights as a pr…

In California political activities or affiliations are a protected class. Whether his document qualifies for that would be debatable I would imagine.

I don't see it getting to litigation though. I'd be shocked if Google didn't offer him a fairly hefty severance payment in return for a release of all legal claims.

EDIT: Maybe don't listen to any of my predictions m'kay.

https://twitter.com/daiwaka/status/894747912701263873

(tweet author is a NYTimes Journalist who covers Google)

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#165

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #110
wildmusings wrote: post #35

The author's arguments have been completely misrepresented. He pointed out widely-believed and sometimes scientifically-established differences in the DISTRIBUTION OF traits in men and women. He said that those differences make attempts to achieve numerical parity misguided, discriminatory, and harmful. What is his conclusion about how we should behave? "Treat people as individuals, not as just another member of thei…

What else is the American mind unfairly closed to? Why is "women are, in the the large, excepting some outliers, biologically disfavored to become programmers" the threshold issue? What else should we be more open-minded about? We're also very closed-minded about: * Child labor * The facially legitimate grievances of Al Qaeda * Universal suffrage * The illegality of marital rape Does it just happen that this particul…

[deleted]

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#166

Post by agentdrtran »

groupthinkqmark wrote: post #38
Afforess wrote: post #4

I read the memo and didn't find it particularly persuasive; but this dismissal does further its core point. It's a bit tone deaf of Google to fire an employee concerned about groupthink.

This is not a workable argument against firing someone. If it were, all you'd have to do is say, "We have too much group-think here," followed by any egregiously awful statement, and you'd be insulated from consequences. That's just not how these things work. I think any good argument against firing him has to hinge on the truth of what he said besides the group-think claims. Regrettably for him, I don't think there'…

"the groupthink is terrible here! I can't say I want women to be thrown into a trash compactor without everyone getting mad!"

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#167

Post by hashbig »

sidlls wrote: post #74
wyclif wrote: post #31

Fun fact: the author of the memo earned a PhD in Biology from Harvard. Google can fire him and get away with it, but it's going to be tough, very tough, for him to be falsely characterized as someone who is misinformed or unscientific. And the court of public opinion may well be more important in this controversy than any court of law.

When I was in academia there was no shortage of my peers with PhDs in physics who were very religious. Having a PhD in a science is not proof against having misinformed or unscientific views.

Being religious and scientific are not mutually exclusive. I am not a religious person, but my professor, who is very religious, is one of the most rigorous scientists I had the chance to work with in person.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#168

Post by _xhok »

tptacek wrote: post #110
wildmusings wrote: post #35

The author's arguments have been completely misrepresented. He pointed out widely-believed and sometimes scientifically-established differences in the DISTRIBUTION OF traits in men and women. He said that those differences make attempts to achieve numerical parity misguided, discriminatory, and harmful. What is his conclusion about how we should behave? "Treat people as individuals, not as just another member of thei…

What else is the American mind unfairly closed to? Why is "women are, in the the large, excepting some outliers, biologically disfavored to become programmers" the threshold issue? What else should we be more open-minded about? We're also very closed-minded about: * Child labor * The facially legitimate grievances of Al Qaeda * Universal suffrage * The illegality of marital rape Does it just happen that this particul…

His claim: across various traits, men and women have distributions that differ in mean but still largely overlap. This is a possible non-bias cause of the gender gap in tech. Specifically to ward off the concern you're about to raise, he adds a tedious note and graphic: http://diversitymemo.com/#possible-causes-gender-gap

You read all of this, and promptly summarize: "women are, in the the large, excepting some outliers, biologically disfavored to become programmers."

What's happening here?

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#169

Post by agentdrtran »

brown9-2 wrote: post #160
maxxxxx wrote: post #12

This is starting to be scary. Instead of government companies are acting as thought police. I think a lot of people will watch what they are saying publicly from now on.

I would be curious to know at which point in history one could circulate a memo around the office which embarrassed the company and insulted half the workforce without repercussion.

Well not half, only about what, 30%? /s
Post reply on HN