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

Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 282 posts

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#261

Post by HelloNurse »

potatolicious wrote: post #232
5ilv3r wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, profiling is no good. Probably a better idea to work on a solid recruiting process that can shake out practitioners of bad behavior from the candidate pool. Then you can handle it and more.

> "Probably a better idea to work on a solid recruiting process that can shake out practitioners of bad behavior from the candidate pool." I agree in principle - but how do you suggest this be done? It's not as if harassers are going to cop to it in an interview. I: "Have you sexually harassed your colleagues at previous jobs?" C: "Oh yeah, sure, yep, I'll show myself out now." Nor are companies permitted to answer w…

You are assuming Uber could/would look out for potential sexual harassers, but suddenly starting to care isn't as easy and obvious as you make it; their idea of "bad actors" is likely to be different, including potential complainers, whistleblowers, union leaders, etc.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#262

Post by azernik »

graphememes wrote: post #244

Controversial opinion here... Why are the vocal hacker news commenters against segregated groups? For instance, what would be the issue with places that have selective hiring for individuals that meet their cultural composition and why does that bother you specifically? Isn't that the case in every location? In this case, there was harassment, however generally it is understood that "birds of a feather flock together…

Because, given the gender balance when it comes to people on positions of power (eg company CEOs), this would drastically reduce the career prospects of women, minorities, etc, since cultures decided on by white males are often hostile to those groups. And we have, as a society, decided to use the law to prevent such outcomes.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#263

Post by doktrin »

tankenmate wrote: post #216
rdxm wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> who enabled HR please tell me this is a joke right? you can't possibly be asking that question seriously..

HR is a business function, and the business is run by executives, so unless the HR function is run day to day by the CEO then HR needs to be enabled by someone. The HR function in a company the size of Uber is a deliberate structure that is guided by business goals set by the executive team, the executive team gives the HR function the authority within the framework (policy, implicit and explicit direction) provided.…

I think the parent was saying that there's no point in really asking this question because the answer is that it obviously came from senior leadership, clearly including but probably not exclusively limited to the CEO.

This isn't the sort of stuff that I could single handedly prove in a court of law, but frankly none of this comes as much of a surprise. Anyone who's come within shouting distance of that company knows how it operates : heavy on kool-aid & low on self-restraint - an MO that comes straight from the very top.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#264

Post by onion2k »

macspoofing wrote: post #34
hueving wrote: post #7

I wonder if events like this turn Uber employees who leave around this time into a market of lemons. Obviously nobody will put on their resume that they were fired for sexual harassment so hiring managers will have to wonder if a person who left Uber recently was fed up or fired. Seems risky to hire a recent Uber employee at this point because bringing a toxic sexist into the company can inflict massive damage.

>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…

Jesus. They are still people. You want to ostracize them from all society and prevent them from earning a living in their chosen career?

No one has an absolute right to work in the industry of their choice. If you join a company that makes your future career more difficult then that's bad luck, but maybe it's also a lesson for us all: speak up for your coworkers when you see bad behaviour, and don't let things escalate to the point where other companies might see you as a bad hire for something you didn't do.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#265

Post by ThrustVectoring »

linkregister wrote: post #223
theptip wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The suggestion is not that those who were fired did nothing wrong. It's that they are being made to take the fall to shield higher-ups who also have done things wrong.

The suggestion is actually, just that. That is the literal meaning of "scapegoat" in English: one who is wrongfully taking the blame for another. The other responder, dopamean, answered the question considering that context.

Yeah, that was my fault for making it unclear.

They're guilty of sexual harassment, but scapegoats for the culture that gave them free reign for so long.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#266

Post by teddythetwig »

philipov wrote: post #237
bigiain wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read it (correctly or not) as saying: "Travis started and runs the company, and his respect for women is well known and public. Of _course_ the people working in HR know this, and were quite likely selected/employed by him or one of his trusted douche-bros..." Is it _not_ as obvious to everyone else as it seems to be to me?

It is beside the point whether it's obvious or not; clearly it is not obvious enough. You treat it as if it's some purely academic pursuit, not of interest to anybody. No, the question should be repeated incessantly until the right people go to jail.

Go to jail? I think that is a little bit harsh considering the crimes committed. When will America stop being so damn protestant when it comes to punishment?

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#267

Post by user5994461 »

mdpye wrote: post #113
user5994461 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You never list references from your last job. You don't want your future company to call your current company to give them a heads up that you are leaving. For this very same reason, companies never ask for reference from your current job.

In the UK, you tend to get an offer conditional on references, and you only provide them once you've given notice to your current place.

That's absolutely not what's meant by "listing references". The OP is talking about listing reference, possibly on his resume or on-request, to companies he's prospecting.

The UK has a custom to perform an employment and criminal check by a 3rd party company when you join a new company (after you signed a contract and already gave your notice). That's unrelated.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#268

Post by dllthomas »

HelloNurse wrote: post #260
dllthomas wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uber is big and the culture in any given pocket varies quite a bit. It's entirely possible not to have known what was going on 200 employees over.

Are you claiming that good teams with a good culture actually exist at Uber? What's your evidence?

I worked on one.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#269

Post by jlebrech »

I'm not detracting from the real sexual harassment that occurred but looking for naughty people to fire is one of the first steps before redundancies. All it takes is for the IT department to scour the exchange server for ignored or rejected emails asking a female colleague if she wants a coffee, and making them the cost free fires.

Re: Uber Fires More Than 20 Employees in Harassment Probe

#270

Post by moomin »

TokenDiversity wrote: post #182
moomin wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real question is: did senior people in HR have to walk? If they did, you can feel reasonably confident their replacements won't repeat their behaviours. I'll remind everyone that we're talking about an HR department that repeatedly lied to its employees and did their damndest to shield bad people. If that isn't fixed, you can be guaranteed it'll happen again, whether or not another Fowler decides to do the world…

You bring an important point which raises another point- who enabled/let HR do this? And what happened to them? HR doesn't exist in isolation and I've known big firms' HRs to be trigger happy as long as they can justify it.

As many have pointed out: we already know the answer to that question. However, bringing down a founder if the paper trail doesn't lead back to them directly is extremely hard (and I'm only adding that qualification because of GitHub) so he's untouchable. And the culture undoubtedly reflects his desires. However, if senior people in HR know that _doing what the CEO wanted won't save them from being fired for cause_, it'll concentrate minds quite effectively.
Post reply on HN