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

Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 328 posts

Re: Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

#261

Post by [deleted] »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #191
pm90 wrote: post #99

> In a letter to employees made public in October, Ms. Townsend said Activision had “exited” 20 employees and another 20 had faced disciplinary action. “We know there’s a desire to know about the outcome when misconduct is reported,” Ms. Townsend wrote. “Sometimes, there are privacy reasons we can’t share. But where we can, we will be sharing more information with you. We will also be providing you regular, aggregate…

> They fired 20 people, not the CEO Oh no, he's trying to save face and trying to make it look like he fixed the issues - even though he was a participant and he allowed this culture to develop.

[deleted]

Re: Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

#262

Post by bsenftner »

0xfaded wrote: post #258
huxflux wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might be out of the loop, but what is indicating that, this is what actually happened?

Setting culture is a large part of leadership. Most likely one of two things happened: a) the leadership was complicit in the culture, b) the leadership was too weak to prevent a toxic culture from festering. In either case, the leadership is not fit for, ahem, leadership.

Don't forget the more likely situation of absent leadership and the resulting "Lord of the Flies" situation that results.

FWIW, I had many friends spend time at Activision. Lord of the Flies is an apt description of their internal politics.

Re: Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

#263

Post by lelanthran »

ALittleLight wrote: post #19
Overtonwindow wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blizzard won't say that, too much liability.

What does it mean that there is too much liability? What liability do you have for saying true things? "That person was fired because an investigation conducted by our company suggested they participated in sexual harassment."

> What does it mean that there is too much liability? What liability do you have for saying true things?

Problem is, in many countries, it's not a fact until a court has made a judgement.

Bearing in mind that the accused employees are technically and legally innocent, you are introducing a few problems. First, the disadvantages of calling these people criminals:

1. They can (and probably will win) sue you for calling them a criminal.

2. The resulting news that a court found against you is a bigger problem. You called someone a criminal, they sued you for it and won. Now you have to deal with the fact that as far as the public goes, you just fired and shamed innocent people.

3. Finally, after the news gets out, all the employees who were laid off in the same round and with same accusations now have legal precedent to challenge your accusations of criminality. And due to precedent, they will almost surely win.

Now, the disadvantages of giving only their start/end dates and job title when called:

[uhh, I can't think of anything ...]

It all boils down to "there is some risk in badmouthing them" vs "there is literally no risk, 0% risk at all, is saying nothing about their behaviour".

Re: Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

#264

Post by vanusa »

huxflux wrote: post #241
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They fired 20 people, not the CEO Oh no, he's trying to save face and trying to make it look like he fixed the issues - even though he was a participant and he allowed this culture to develop.

I might be out of the loop, but what is indicating that, this is what actually happened?

I was "out of the loop", too - until I read the article. It's all there, just a few paragraphs down.

Even if you believe the "maximize shareholder value" line - it is the very definition of the CEO's job to prevent stuff like this from happening.

Re: Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

#265

Post by speed_spread »

refurb wrote: post #129
awb wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many companies I consult for in the US won’t provide a negative reference but instead answer all reference questions with: “I can confirm that they were employed here from MM/YY to MM/YY”. If you hear that it means it didn’t end well. Otherwise, many managers are happy to give a positive reference.

Huh. My company won’t do anything more than confirm date of hire and salary. You could probably get a manager to give an informal reference “off the books”, not on company time.

They confirm _salary_ ?! How on earth is this not private information? When negotiating salary for a new job, the employer will sometimes try to coerce you into giving this info in order to low-ball you and now all they have to do is call your former employer... wtf

And yet I'm sure they try to keep anyone still employed from revealing their current salary to their coworkers.

Re: Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

#266

Post by aflag »

Planktonne wrote: post #242
aspaviento wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the need of stigmatizing these people? If they did wrong, they have been fired for it. They don't need to be permanently punished for a mistake. That won't help anyone.

Being fired for harassment/abuse doesn't magically mean that you'll never harass or abuse someone in the future. Hiring someone with a track record of these issues puts your other employees at risk.

Are you saying they can't ever be hired again then?

Re: Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

#267

Post by ben174 »

bertil wrote: post #243
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #5

Question, when these people find a new job will the person hiring them know?

I’ve worked in the gaming industry and I was surprised how some fairly standard questions about creativity, playing games, character development, etc. lead to detailed insights into the candidate’s personality. We’ve had candidates answer “You have to organise a fun evening for the 80 employees of this office. Your budget is $10. What do you do?” (a question meant to leverage their understanding that 70 of those 80 a…

If you expect an honest answer from your candidate, and you don't expect a well-qualified candidate to choose a well-endowed female to be their character of choice, then you're living in a fantasy world. I understand that it's insane to talk about that during an interview, but I think it's fairly common for non-creepy people to choose a character they find pleasurable to look at.

Re: Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

#268

Post by nix23 »

saberience wrote: post #251
nix23 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm in theory it would start to rot from where it has the biggest exposure to air and or bacteria...so my highly scientific theory: It starts from the head because gills, but the stink comes from the guts (lack of fresh air) ;)

It's not about taking it literally... it's a proverb. It means organization or militaries or whatever else usually goes bad due to leadership, not due to the people at the bottom of the hierarchy. I thought this was obvious.

>It's not about taking it literally... it's a proverb.

Like "no BS Sherlock"?

Re: Activision Blizzard pushes out dozens of employees over workplace misconduct

#269

Post by bigbillheck »

Terretta wrote: post #225
icu wrote: post #179

Until Bobby goes it's all corporate bs. The fish rots at the head.

> The fish rots at the head. This isn’t a fish. And as a kid living on the water, saw plenty of dead fish — usually the head is the last identifiable part to go (middle goes first).

> This isn’t a fish

Are you familiar with the concept of 'metaphor'?

Post reply on HN