Google staff walk out over women's treatment • Hacker News Board

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#291

Post by CydeWeys » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:31 PM UTC

module0000 wrote: post #199

anon1252 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's no real process in place for situations of misconduct in the office. There shouldn't be a "process" set by Google when it comes to sexual harassment, employees should be able to sue, that's the process,sexual harassment is a crime, they can't sue because Google force them into arbitration, which should be illegal for an employer to do that to an employee IMHO. this is a denial of justice.

I'm not trying to troll you, but it's a voluntary "denial of justice". No one compels or coerces people to seek employment there. They apply, go through several interviews, and then voluntarily agree to whatever it is they agree to before day #1 of work. As long as people are willing to work there under XYZ conditions, people will continue to work there under XYZ conditions.

By the same token, employees are allowed to advocate for change once they are working there.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#292

Post by samstave » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:32 PM UTC

I'd wager that the walkout was over the $2,000,000 a month paid to Rubin.

Also, people claimed that the payment was to keep Rubin from working with competitors... But some others say that it was to buy his silence over what others might have been doing...

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#293

Post by sunir » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:34 PM UTC

cjslep wrote: post #257

sunir wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is poor judgment to create an organization that does nothing to secure its people from sexual harassment. Not sure why you would disagree but if that is what you intended I do not want to work for you.

Youre being incredibly unfair: That's not at all what I said, and your post I responded to also made no claim along these lines. You're misrepresenting my and your past statements. What we were talking about is ending forced arbitration (the "process" referred to by the person you responded to) so that the law can be used to protect victims. That doesn't mean protections at work suddenly go away. It also doesn't mean…

The post I replied to implied that the criminal justice system is the only solution to these problems:

"employees should be able to sue, that's the process,sexual harassment is a crime, they can't sue because Google force them into arbitration,"

Notwithstanding the unbelievable confusion of law in that post is a whole other conversation.

I argued that companies should also have a plan in place to prevent sexual harassment at work by using an analogy to robbery, also a crime, that we use preventative measures to stop despite there being a criminal system punishing robbery.

Your response was claiming I was expressing poor judgment for arguing that companies are responsible for not creating environments rife for sexual harassment.

"Comparing sexual assault to a store robbery in a tone of sarcasm is at best a poor judgement call."

I don't agree. I think it's a reasonable demonstration of the absurdity of the position I'm replying to.

I don't know what else you wrote, but that's what I replied to.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#294

Post by criddell » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:41 PM UTC

JacobJans wrote: post #12

ChrisRR wrote: post #10

So the first demand is "A commitment to end pay and opportunity inequality" I'd like to see the actual data behind this constant inequality claim. I would be genuinely interested to see what kind of difference there is between the sexes when comparing like-for-like jobs. I've heard speculation that women don't argue for higher salaries as much as men, I've also heard that the data is never accurate because it doesn't…

That's what they're asking for too: more data.

If any company has the data, it's Google. If they had a good story to tell, I think they'd be sharing that data.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#295

Post by astura » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:50 PM UTC

malvosenior wrote: post #211

Nelkins wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. When you perform an online search for articles on the "wage gap myth," the majority of the articles seem traceable back to her.

It's because even though there is no data to support the wage gap, it's very unpopular to question it. Christina Hoff Summers is a pioneer in the field of gender equality and has paid a huge price by actually investigating these issues. It's a risky position to take in today's political climate so not many have followed her footsteps.

>there is no data to support the wage gap

This is false.

https://www.epi.org/publication/what-is-the-gender-pay-gap-a...

>it's very unpopular to question it.

Also false, it's very popular (and almost cliché) to dismiss it.

>Christina Hoff Summers... has paid a huge price by actually investigating these issues.

And what price would that be? She seems extremely successful.

http://www.aei.org/scholar/christina-hoff-sommers/

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#296

Post by lucio » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:51 PM UTC

smacktoward wrote: post #187

kamaal wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody ever gets interview feedbacks in this industry. What you are saying is true, but its always impossible to establish intentions. And either way you have to sue. All the best ever getting a job if you are known to do legal fights against prospective employers. >>Union organizing is not a "part time political project," it is a legally protected right. One believes in these things only until they become managers t…

> One believes in these things only until they become managers themselves. The law isn't Tinker Bell, it doesn't require you to believe in it to exist. > And every one aspires to be one in this industry. It's difficult to think of anything sadder than a person who assents to his own exploitation in the hopes that maybe, someday, he will get to exploit someone else.

so all managers are exploiters?

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#297

Post by YorkshireSeason » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:58 PM UTC

astura wrote: post #285

YorkshireSeason wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The salient difference is that outages are measurable. In contrast, "harassment" is an extremely controversial subject that nobody agrees upon, for example, in some legislations, calling a person with XY chromosomes "him" rather than "her" is considered a hate crime, a dramatic change from labelling conventions of just a few years ago. Indeed what constitutes harassment is a major point of contention between differen…

You do a chromosomal analysis on everyone before you use a gendered pronoun to describe them? Because you can't tell what their chromosomes are just by appearance.

I can have an educated guess from just a brief glance -- especially if the other person doesn't actively tries to mislead me on such an important issue.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#298

Post by ergothus » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:59 PM UTC

malvosenior wrote: post #274

ergothus wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's funny that you say that I think you misunderstood my point in the "answers that are out there for anyone serious to find" - I'm saying it's worth restating your arguments even if you think people "should" know the "obvious" and "proven". Nothing in that position makes it ironic that I also stated my understanding of things (Be that understanding right or wrong). > If you say data is available to support your a…

Even the wikipedia article says there's no citation given to backup the claims (see first paragraph). > The remaining 6% of the gap has been speculated to originate from gender discrimination and a difference in ability and/or willingness to negotiate salaries. So according to wikipedia, men may have higher ability or be better negotiators? I don't see a gender pay gap here. Here's a good article on the subject: http…

> Here's a good article on the subject:

How so? The article rants about the 78% claim, without addressing that (a) even correcting for the concerns they state a pay gap exists, and (b) those "choices" men and women make aren't always free choices (witness who takes parental leave in the US vs in more egalitarian countries.

> men may have higher ability or be better negotiators? I don't see a gender pay gap here.

I fail to see how not knowing the source of a gap disproves the gap.

And men having more frequent and successful negotiations is a pretty tested topic itself. When perceived aggression garners one gender respect and another disdain, it's an inevitable result.

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#299

Post by DoreenMichele » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 7:00 PM UTC

I don't understand this at all.

Google chief executive Sundar Pichai has told staff he supports their right to take the action.

"I understand the anger and disappointment that many of you feel," he said in an all-staff email. "I feel it as well, and I am fully committed to making progress on an issue that has persisted for far too long in our society… and, yes, here at Google, too."

If someone at the top is sincerely interested in resolving this satisfactorily, why the walk-out? I don't get it.

Are they saying they don't really believe him?

Re: Google staff walk out over women's treatment

#300

Post by kerbalspacepro » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 7:01 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #275

kerbalspacepro wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unionisation of doctors in America is one of the reasons that the American healthcare system is so bad though. Maybe we shouldn't encourage any industry to increase its inefficiency by unionizing, and instead just offer a set of universal regulations that keep workers (both skilled and unskilled alike) from getting shafted?

Very few American doctors are unionized. If you're referring to the AMA, it is specifically not a union.

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck... well, let me quote the Atlantic's Matthew Stewart:

>You see, when educated people with excellent credentials band together to advance their collective interest, it’s all part of serving the public good by ensuring a high quality of service, establishing fair working conditions, and giving merit its due. That’s why we do it through “associations,” and with the assistance of fellow professionals wearing white shoes. When working-class people do it—through unions—it’s a violation of the sacred principles of the free market.