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

Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 93 posts

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#31

Post by Devils_Avocado »

Devils_Avocado wrote: post #21
vonmoltke wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fiduciary obligations of maximising net returns on invested capital There is no such obligation. Please stop spreading bullshit. Edit: To those who don't believe me, see another post in the thread[1] or other sources on corporate law[2][3]. Note that the duty of loyalty says nothing about maximizing anything, and such a legal standard is preposterous. [1] https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/01/myth-maximizing-shar…

What do their contracts say? Agnostic of your own judgement of the morality of their actions, company agents are employed by shareholders to maximise returns on invested capital. It's literally the only reason the company pays them a salary from net profits.

...and who owns the corporate entity? The "owners of shares"?

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#32

Post by XCabbage »

starbeast wrote: post #5

>“Google announced a prospective policy change that applies going forward to individual sex harassment and sex assault claims. This policy change does not apply retroactively to claims already compelled to arbitration.” Given the context, the phrase "already compelled to arbitration" sounds pretty fucking disgusting. It gave me nausea just reading it. Perhaps Google's lawyers should take slightly more care over these…

I don't get it. Why is this even controversial, let alone "fucking disgusting"? What exactly do you expect Google to do instead?

As I see it, they have 3 options:

1. Give accusers the right to choose whether to relitigate claims currently in progress, effectively allowing them to judge whether to restart their case from scratch based on how well it's currently going and forcing individuals accused of misconduct to be investigated twice for the same offence.

2. Somehow unilaterally force all current cases to be moved to the courts, removing their secrecy, and exposing the details of previously confidential claims to the world without the consent of the alleged victim.

3. Do exactly what they're currently doing.

Do you see some option that I don't? Or are you advocating for options 1 or 2? I suspect both of them would be completely illegal.

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#33

Post by mikestew »

Devils_Avocado wrote: post #19
lallysingh wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what are the long-term effects on returns of good employees leaving, or never coming to Google over shit like this?

Google/Alphabet get fucked sideways. Seems you & all the fellow downvoters've mistaken my statement of fact for a statement of moral obligation... Company agents are employed by shareholders to maximise returns on invested capital. It's literally in their contracts: "you get paid X for improving metric Y by Z".

Seems you & all the fellow downvoters've mistaken my statement of fact for a statement of moral obligation...

Nope, it's the calling of statements "facts" when they are quite arguable nothing of the sort. Moral obligation was not at issue here.

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#34

Post by 0x262d »

zeroname wrote: post #8
starbeast wrote: post #5

>“Google announced a prospective policy change that applies going forward to individual sex harassment and sex assault claims. This policy change does not apply retroactively to claims already compelled to arbitration.” Given the context, the phrase "already compelled to arbitration" sounds pretty fucking disgusting. It gave me nausea just reading it. Perhaps Google's lawyers should take slightly more care over these…

Forced arbitration should simply be illegal. As long as it's legal, you can't expect individual companies to not make use of it, that would be a competitive disadvantage.

actually, this sort of criticism and shaming is exactly what causes things to become illegal. meanwhile, market veneration is both economically illiterate and used as ideological cover for massive crimes.

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#35

Post by Devils_Avocado »

josefx wrote: post #29
Devils_Avocado wrote: post #13

> If Google's goal is truly to create a safer work environment for everyone... Google's directors' goal is to fulfil their fiduciary obligations of maximising net returns on invested capital, the same as 100% of every other corporate entity that has ever existed. edit: LOL so many brigading white knights posting that've never had a corporate job or signed a contract :-D

How did their support of sexual misconduct in the past further the goal of maximizing profit? Is there a known metric that shows how profitability increases after a given percentage of harassed workers? I think it has less to do with "fiduciary obligations" and more with self serving policies that the people in charge will put in place as long as they can get away with them. Letting one of the accused walk out with a…

You'd have to ask them (after noting that preemptively out-of-court settling breach of contract claims with a large cash sum & an NDA is standard practice throughout the Western world).

I don't get why all the rabid SJW downvoters think I'm defending Google here? The "self-serving policies" you mention are that they maximise their bonuses by suppressing negative information such as this as long as they can.

EDIT: makes a statement that it's bad that Google implemented these policies, explains how their perverse contractual incentives led to these actions; gets downvoted to oblivion... hmmmmm..................

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#36

Post by dfxm12 »

mbrumlow wrote: post #12
rustcharm wrote: post #11

Well, of course. It’s only fair. You can’t change a rule then go back and hold prior behaviors accountable according to the new rule. It’s just common decency.

I suspect your view on this matter will be ill taken. But beyond that. It probably is not legally possible.

It probably is not legally possible.

I wonder what legal standing a private company's "policy" has. Is it written into a contract of some sort, "if you are accused of sexual misconduct, we will follow policy X"? Are all those contracts now being updated?

Realistically, Google can handle this how they want, so I don't see why they can't change how they handle current claims (within reason, of course, I'm sure if your arbitration date is tomorrow, maybe it's bad to change that so suddenly). Of course, Google is going to want to minimize the public knowing about any of these claims, so they'll do what they can to keep it quiet.

I get the feeling that these policies have more value to marketing dept. than the legal dept. After all, there many things that constitute "sexual misconduct" that aren't illegal.

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#37

Post by 0x262d »

fareesh wrote: post #14
save_ferris wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't matter, listening to their lawyers doesn't make it right. Lawyers exist to protect their clients from legal exposure, not to provide a moral compass. If Google's goal is truly to create a safer work environment for everyone, then this is a no-brainer. They had zero problems giving a known-harasser millions to walk away quietly but now they're fighting to avoid responsibility for cases already in the system. R…

My assumption was that lawyers would have factored in the public relations aspect of the decision too, and are confident they can win both in the proceedings as well as in the court of public opinion.

this still doesn't make it not evil.

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#38

Post by Devils_Avocado »

save_ferris wrote: post #30
Devils_Avocado wrote: post #13

> If Google's goal is truly to create a safer work environment for everyone... Google's directors' goal is to fulfil their fiduciary obligations of maximising net returns on invested capital, the same as 100% of every other corporate entity that has ever existed. edit: LOL so many brigading white knights posting that've never had a corporate job or signed a contract :-D

So you're saying that they voluntarily chose to modify their arbitration policy for sexual harassment complaints to fulfill their fiduciary obligations and not to create a safer work environment? How do shareholders benefit from the increased legal exposure of this new policy? And why, if everything Google does is to benefit the bottom line, are they choosing not employ this new policy retroactively? They didn't have…

_

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#39

Post by ergothus »

fareesh wrote: post #14
save_ferris wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't matter, listening to their lawyers doesn't make it right. Lawyers exist to protect their clients from legal exposure, not to provide a moral compass. If Google's goal is truly to create a safer work environment for everyone, then this is a no-brainer. They had zero problems giving a known-harasser millions to walk away quietly but now they're fighting to avoid responsibility for cases already in the system. R…

My assumption was that lawyers would have factored in the public relations aspect of the decision too, and are confident they can win both in the proceedings as well as in the court of public opinion.

That doesnt match the training, approach, nor skillset of the lawyers I know. They advise on legal matters, the client decides based on the sum total. Lawyers would explicitly avoid confusing legal opinions and business ones.

Then again, my lawyer friends aren't google lawyers.

Re: Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't apply to claims in progress

#40

Post by 0x262d »

XCabbage wrote: post #32
starbeast wrote: post #5

>“Google announced a prospective policy change that applies going forward to individual sex harassment and sex assault claims. This policy change does not apply retroactively to claims already compelled to arbitration.” Given the context, the phrase "already compelled to arbitration" sounds pretty fucking disgusting. It gave me nausea just reading it. Perhaps Google's lawyers should take slightly more care over these…

I don't get it. Why is this even controversial, let alone "fucking disgusting"? What exactly do you expect Google to do instead? As I see it, they have 3 options: 1. Give accusers the right to choose whether to relitigate claims currently in progress, effectively allowing them to judge whether to restart their case from scratch based on how well it's currently going and forcing individuals accused of misconduct to be…

it is both legal and moral to let people restart their cases rather than arbitrating, given that arbitration is a known dead end that companies use to avoid responsibility for hurting their employees.

edit: also it's fucking disgusting because it is Google shamelessly covering their asses to protect sexual abusers and a culture of sexual abuse and prevent real justice in a retroactive inquiry. that's completely straightforward.

Post reply on HN