Update on Julie Horvath's Departure • Hacker News Board

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#21

Post by laureny » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:09 AM UTC

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer.

Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true.

This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back?

> The founder’s wife discussed in the media reports has never had hiring or firing power at GitHub and will no longer be permitted in the office.

Why did it take a Techcrunch article to reach this decision? Didn't anyone at Github see anything wrong with that founder's wife doing what she did, according to Julie's statement?

> GitHub has grown incredibly fast over the past two years, bringing a new set of challenges. Nearly a year ago we began a search for an experienced HR Lead and that person came on board in January 2014

Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well.

> Chris Wanstrath > > CEO & Co-Founder

This narrows down the choices: the "founder" who is the cause for all this drama is either PJ Hyett or Tom Preston-Werner.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#22

Post by atomaka » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:09 AM UTC

macspoofing wrote: post #11

Usually there are two sides of the story, but the fact that a non-employee (wife of co-founder) exercised so much power and meddled in internal office politics in the way that she did, it was hard to see how GitHub could even claim a reasonable stance. They screwed this up big time. This is a good response.

Not usually...ALWAYS. There is another side here. Github has just realized they have nothing to gain by defending.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#23

Post by joshbert » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:09 AM UTC

skywhopper wrote: post #4

It's good to see this statement out of Github. The general tone and specifically the mention of the founder's wife in this post gives a huge amount of credence to Julie's claims. I hope Github follows through on this with as much sincerity and determination as this post implies.

I agree that the statement is good. I only wish they'd addressed the concerns that were raised regarding them having access to/messing with private repos.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#24

Post by cpayne » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:10 AM UTC

leothekim wrote: post #15

Now, what does "put on leave" mean? Is that "suspended with pay"? "Stay low until the dust settles"? Or, "terminated after further review"?

It means just that!

Github have a very fine line to walk. They don't have traditional shareholders to make happy. At the end of the day, all they have is their brand to protect.

Ask Microsoft how important their brand is after releasing Windows ME. Or Blackberry just after the iPhone came out.

Clearly something has happened, but they have to not only find out what happened, but to also be transparent and show that they are trying to find out what happened.

I think its the best response you can expect given the circumstances.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#25

Post by leccine » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:10 AM UTC

leothekim wrote: post #15

Now, what does "put on leave" mean? Is that "suspended with pay"? "Stay low until the dust settles"? Or, "terminated after further review"?

I guess they need to figure out the legal implications of what happened...

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#26

Post by almightygod » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:10 AM UTC

This whole incident is sad. It's incredibly sad for Julie, for everyone at GitHub, for the founders, and for the alleged "crazy" founder wife who was banned from a company she probably sacrificed a lot for

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#27

Post by flylib » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:11 AM UTC

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

> Doesn't appear so. They did get an HR person, but an experienced one? Not a chance. No experienced HR person would have let any of that get as far as it got. That HR person should probably be put on leave or be fired as well.

> that person came on board in January 2014

most of the things that had happened predated the HR person coming on, but you do have a point, the wife thing should of stopped since January

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#28

Post by sitharus » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:12 AM UTC

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

> > We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer.

> Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true.

> This is great news, but putting on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposition to the healthy growth of the company. Surely they don't want them back?

It's pretty standard practice to place employees on paid leave while serious complaints are investigated. You don't want to fire them until you have a pretty solid case as they might sue, but likewise you don't want them in the office.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#29

Post by leccine » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:12 AM UTC

jw2013 wrote: post #16

"the relevant founder has been put on leave... The founder’s wife... will no longer be permitted in the office." Almost exactly what I expected. As the startup grows larger (200+ employees now for Github?) it's not uncommon to have some cultural setback. +1 for Github trying to fix it asap, but still Chris Wanstrath did not mention how are they exactly going to fix the culture. Putting founder on leave is by no means…

What do you think needed to be fixed? You are assuming that everything Julie states is right...

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#30

Post by tw268 » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:13 AM UTC

laureny wrote: post #21

> We know we have to take action and have begun a full investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave, as has the referenced GitHub engineer. Pretty much a full admission that everything that Julie said is true. This is great news, but putting these people on leave seems to be too nice. It's clear that these two people obey ethics that are in direct oppposit…

GitHub is known to have a dubstep and IPA culture. If they want to be a standard bearer for feminism in tech, the transition is going to be difficult and they are going to take some hits. The two cultures don't mix well.

It sounds like GitHub is going to have to become more stale and corporate to survive as a larger company, which is inevitable, but hastened by their own choices.