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

Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 534 posts

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#521

Post by Arizhel »

marcusgarvey wrote: post #300
nkoren wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend of mine experienced a somewhat worse level of harassment at her job. She lawyered up and quickly received an offer for a non-trivial silver parachute, and a mutual non-disparagement agreement on her way out the door. Seemed like a fine solution, but it soon became evident that she had, in fact, been blacklisted: 18 months passed before anybody would even give her an interview, and that was only after decidin…

I believe that blacklisting is something that happens in cases like this, and I wonder how it gets coordinated. Especially when there's no public record of a court case. Simply that every time her previous employer was called for a reference, they gave her an unflattering one? Or is it more proactive, like some sort of list that's known in the HR world of certain industries?

Employers aren't supposed to call previous employers for references unless you OK it first, and many employers have explicit policies to not give references because of the potential for being sued.

Of course, it does happen, in various ways. The way to find out is to find a sympathetic recruiter (or, a "recruiter" who's really your friend), and have them call for a reference for you. There's good fodder for a lawsuit here.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#522

Post by lawpoop »

brudgers wrote: post #438
danaliv wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe the reporter didn't read the blog post, because it was beyond his attention span. I know Mike and I assure you that (1) he has the attention span to read a blog post, and (2) he was not just "assigned." He's on the tech beat. He lives in San Francisco, not New York. And he's paying very close attention to this story. Go look at his Twitter feed if you don't believe me. https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac

Curious if the reporter uses or has used Uber. If so, it is the sort of thing that traditional journalism standards would probably applaud disclosing as a potential conflict of interest. To me, this is particularly relevant for a reporter on the Silicon Valley tech beat who is likely to have past interactions with companies like Uber...given the reality that working the Silicon Valley tech beat for the New York Times…

Uses or has used Uber... in San Francisco?

Curious, do you think a reporter in the 1980s would have the same conflict of interest reporting on AT&T, the phone company that everyone used?

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#523

Post by st3v3r »

Arizhel wrote: post #513
mcherm wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mild sexism is endemic to a portion of our industry. But I honestly have not previously encountered allegations on the level of "my boss propositioned me on my first day and HR said they wouldn't do anything". I would like to pay attention: we can't improve this problem unless we pay attention. If you would be willing to point me to a few examples of people making similar claims, I will commit to reading through them…

>I would like to pay attention: we can't improve this problem unless we pay attention. What's this "we" business? Who's "we"? I don't know about you, but I'm an engineer. I am neither a manager, nor an executive, nor an HR goon. I accept no responsibility for the actions of people in those positions. Especially those useless HR people. We engineers are nothing more than low-level lackeys, rank-and-file employees who…

And that attitude makes you part of the problem.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#524

Post by Arizhel »

st3v3r wrote: post #523
Arizhel wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I would like to pay attention: we can't improve this problem unless we pay attention. What's this "we" business? Who's "we"? I don't know about you, but I'm an engineer. I am neither a manager, nor an executive, nor an HR goon. I accept no responsibility for the actions of people in those positions. Especially those useless HR people. We engineers are nothing more than low-level lackeys, rank-and-file employees who…

And that attitude makes you part of the problem.

Ok, fine. Please tell me exactly what I can do to help, and make sure it doesn't get me fired.

Your turn.

Let me guess; you don't have an answer, just your snide, pithy response.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#525

Post by Chris2048 »

eropple wrote: post #410
theWatcher37 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a hateful and oddly specific comment. "I've read your comments" Yeah, ok buddy

He's not wrong. 'hueving's comment history around here pushes an extreme-right-wing viewpoint that is cloaked in just enough civility to make the decent folks I know around here reconsider whether or not it's worth engaging with him. (Many don't, because it's exhausting to be alternative-facted to death.) I wouldn't expect a woman--or anyone--to tell me jack and/or shit if I was comfortable expressing worldviews that…

> who is a fantastic poster around here

DanBC sticks in my mind as a poster that I disagree with on most things. Can you tell me why he is a "fantastic poster"?

> is not wrong to use the history of a poster to challenge his I-don't-see-it-so-it-doesn't-exist dismissals

It is on the basis that DanBC has no idea how HN post history has to do with what that poster sees. It's just an Ad-hom.

> I spent a minute browsing your latest work, too

> as with most modern conservatives

Is your own profile fair game then too? Whatever I dislike about you past comments I can dredge up randomly to harass you with whenever you make a comment I don't like?

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#526

Post by geezerjay »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #457
acchow wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish papers could run non-stories along with the usual stories: "Uber Sexual Harassment Claims Story - In Progress This story is in progress, and the following are the verified facts: The following are claims that no media has reliable, verifiable source on yet. If they are reporting on them as fact, you might want to reconsider what media you trust: We will publish our full story when we the picture is clea…

Sometimes merely repeating an unsubstantiated fact can expose a news org to liability. Take, for instance, a slander or libel case.

> unsubstantiated fact

That's just like dry water. If it's a fact then it's verifiable. If it can't be verified, it isn't a fact: just baseless hearsay.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#527

Post by Terretta »

brudgers wrote: post #404
Tloewald wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious as to whether you're complaining about the story. What do you mean by "spiked"? The coverage seems fair and open-ended

Fowler's statement describes ongoing and systematic patterns of discrimination, retribution and harassment against and of women and its facilitation by the human resource department. The headline leads with Uber's damage control message and ignores the most serious part of Fowler's description.

In case you're still following, another Uber engineer's voice:

https://medium.com/@hadrad1000/reflecting-on-susan-fowlers-r...

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#528

Post by mcherm »

Arizhel wrote: post #513
mcherm wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mild sexism is endemic to a portion of our industry. But I honestly have not previously encountered allegations on the level of "my boss propositioned me on my first day and HR said they wouldn't do anything". I would like to pay attention: we can't improve this problem unless we pay attention. If you would be willing to point me to a few examples of people making similar claims, I will commit to reading through them…

>I would like to pay attention: we can't improve this problem unless we pay attention. What's this "we" business? Who's "we"? I don't know about you, but I'm an engineer. I am neither a manager, nor an executive, nor an HR goon. I accept no responsibility for the actions of people in those positions. Especially those useless HR people. We engineers are nothing more than low-level lackeys, rank-and-file employees who…

> What's this "we" business? Who's "we"?

> I don't know about you, but I'm an engineer. I am neither a manager, nor an executive, nor an HR goon.

Guess what? I'm also an engineer. (My official title is "Architect".) I do not manage anyone. I am not an executive. I do not work with the nice, helpful folks in HR.

But I DO take responsibility for the overall behavior of my organization. I do not bear that responsibility alone, but along with the rest of the people I work with. "If it's broken, fix it!" is fundamentally an engineer's credo. "It's not my job" is a pretty poor excuse.

> We engineers are nothing more than low-level lackeys, rank-and-file employees who have zero power except to quit.

Wow. Maybe you need to find a new job. That's not how engineers are treated where I work. Sure, we don't get everything we ever ask for -- but our concerns are taken seriously. And one of our concerns is to create a working environment that is at least minimally acceptable. I may be male, but if I discovered that my company was harboring behavior like Susan Fowler describes, I would take it to HR. If the actions continued, I would report it to the CEO or the board. If that failed I would quit. And I'll never have to do any of those things because plenty of other people I work with would behave the same way and that kind of abuse would never be tolerated.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#529

Post by brudgers »

Terretta wrote: post #527
brudgers wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fowler's statement describes ongoing and systematic patterns of discrimination, retribution and harassment against and of women and its facilitation by the human resource department. The headline leads with Uber's damage control message and ignores the most serious part of Fowler's description.

In case you're still following, another Uber engineer's voice: https://medium.com/@hadrad1000/reflecting-on-susan-fowlers-r...

My remarks: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13697010

The piece is consistent with the Rogue Actor narrative as is the subsequently disclosed investigative structure which involves lawyering up. Most likely to assess the legal risk and perhaps to come up with a strategy that allows truthful but non-incriminating statements should the fallout turn out to entail deposition by hostile lawyers.

Still nobody fired and the official narrative is that the CEO is moved to tears rather than taking personal responsibility.

Re: Uber Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims by Ex-Employee

#530

Post by wfo »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #461
wfo wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the idea was to dig up private information about people in retaliation for them doing their jobs because the things they write don't reflect well on Uber. The first article there is taking a public PR interview that someone chose to give and copy pasting it. He should be thanking Pando for it, they are simply repeating quotes he intentionally gave to the public with a little bit of editorializing. The second one…

No, the idea was to dig up private information about people in retaliation for them doing their jobs because the things they write don't reflect well on Uber. I don't understand - you wrote the word "no" in front a sentence in complete agreement with me. If I understand your argument, it's wrong for Uber to investigate and report true facts because you give them personal information (which presumably would not be use…

I agree with you that Pando has lost any claim of moral superiority and has done very despicable things.

I don't agree with you that "Pando did it" is a good excuse for someone else to do it too.

I do think that Uber is trying to position itself as a respectable company (they are asking people to trust them quite a bit, getting into their cars, giving them their data), not a hive of scum and villainy like Pando is, and they don't deserve to be considered a respectable company if they engage in the same despicable behavior Pando does.

You lose the moral high ground when you do disgusting things to other people. It doesn't matter if they do it too. You keep saying "reporting true facts" but this is not what's immoral, of course. It's immoral to make someone's private life public in retaliation for their public activity (I claim, and I think you'd agree or at least concede the point for the sake of this argument).

Forcibly alter was part hyperbole but also part not. Dumping huge amounts of lobbying money into small governments in order to change the laws to suit your business is political/economic force. Violence is not the only kind of 'forcing' that can be done. Hostile takeovers are not violent, but they are certainly forcible.

Post reply on HN