If this was in Norway the company would go out and say that this is not their stand, and people would try to explain the person why his views is so wrong and hurting in many ways. Fire the person because of something like this would be illegal, and I think it only grows more people with the same thoughts/ideology.
I have no sympathy to James, but what Google does here I belive is more wrong in the long run.
Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
521–530 of 1001 posts
Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
#522https://xkcd.com/1357/
This is actually not even legally correct.
There are protected categories of workplace speech.
Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
#523People can't seem to summarize his argument without getting much of it grossly wrong, because his manifesto was a haphazard collection of good points, bad points, good arguments, lousy arguments, misrepresentations of others' views, and unstated implications. A perfect recipe for people to argue past each other about it. It's worth remembering that one of his conclusions was to end or replace gender-based diversity p…
> because his manifesto was a haphazard collection of good points, bad points, good arguments, lousy arguments, misrepresentations of others' views, and unstated implications. Is this really an honest assessment? I haven't yet seen a single reply to the manifesto that addresses its points and counters the supposedly "lousy arguments" in a neutral tone and objective manner. Please point me to one if you have...
Sure, the second paragraph of this is a good example:
Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
#524[deleted]
Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
#525I'm sad to see this guy fired. He tried very hard to make it clear that he believes diversity is valuable, that discrimination is real and needs to be addressed, and that he was discussing distribution at the population level rather than individuals. And he cited several references in support of his ideas - giving dissenters ample opportunity to attack his arguments on the basis of their merits. The memo had some rough edges and questionable assertions to be sure - but to me at least he came across as a reasonable person that you could have an intelligent discussion with.
But rather than discussing the ideas in the memo, people who have never met him and who presumably don't know the context with which the memo was released have twisted his arguments, made assumptions that he racist and sexist beyond hope of recovery, and needed to be fired.
I understand that his memo was extremely inflammatory and therefore probably not appropriate for the workplace (although, again, I don't know the exact context in which it was distributed initially). But now that it's gone viral - wouldn't it be better to have the discussion rather than trying to silence him and pretend it never happened? Because I am sure there are more people out there with the same views. People who are in charge of hiring decisions, are terrified to discuss their views in public, and are now that much less likely to ever change.
Personally, it's not immediately obvious to me when reading the memo or the cited references that he was wrong. There are a lot of crackpots out there who cling to indefensible ideas and refuse to change their minds in the face of overwhelming evidence - but this guy didn't feel like one of them to me. To me this felt purely like identity politics winning out over intelligent debate and the pursuit of truth.
Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
#526I thought at the very least it was an attempt at a well thought out unpopular opinion that should have at least been met with a productive rebuttal. To fire this guy though, sort of proves his point. You can't speak out against the safe space google is trying to create, without fear. If he's wrong then argue his reasoning. Don't attack his character and silence him.
Google is a for-profit, publicly traded company with millions of investors and thousands of employees. They are not obligated to engage in a public battle of ideas with an employee. They have made their values incredibly clear - if he disagrees with them strongly enough to publish a manifesto, he probably should have already left to find a place where he fit in better. Perhaps Palmer Lucky will hire him.
He didn't make it public, he was advocating for something he thought was for the better. Of course work places can be ruled in any number of ways. I think a lot of peoples perception of Google is that they are pro-intellectualism and encouraged diverse opinions. This shows otherwise. I'm sure he'll be fine, I'm actually not to worried about him. I'm more worried that something like this, something so rooted in good faith and scientific basis, could get someone fired.
Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
#527I view:
Google's actions in this matter (recrimination against an employee over an internal discussion that leaked), which may be a violation of labor relations,
and
AirBNB's recent actions in doxxing and banning users, and canceling their reservations over their political affiliation, which may be a violation of housing discrimination laws,
as linked.
Companies are trying various ways to enforce their chosen behavioral norms upon users/employees.
Is this par for the course over the last 70 years and we are just noticing it now? Or is it something new?
Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
#528Fun fact: the author of the memo earned a PhD in Biology from Harvard. Google can fire him and get away with it, but it's going to be tough, very tough, for him to be falsely characterized as someone who is misinformed or unscientific. And the court of public opinion may well be more important in this controversy than any court of law.
He sure doesn't have a PhD in women's studies.
I love this comment because both sides will strongly agree wit it for completely opposite reasons.
Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
#529It's incredibly ironic that a company that apparently cares about diversity enough to have a "Vice President for Diversity" fired an employee for presenting an opposing viewpoint - to their diversity policy of all things. Further evidence that Google and the other large institutions don't actually give a rat's ass about "diversity". Diversity has absolutely nothing to do with diversity of thought, and is only concern…
> We have a culture of anti-intellectualism and dogmatism around certain topics that for whatever reason are considered sacred and not allowed to be challenged (ie. political correctness), and its disgraceful. From a personal perspective I get where you are coming from, but from a professional perspective it makes no sense. There are ways to present opposing viewpoints in a workplace without offending half of the peo…
>There are ways to present opposing viewpoints in a workplace without offending half of the people who work there.
Ways like not sharing your opposing viewing at all? From a professional perspective Google's management should have ignored the note. It's unprofessional to become wrapped up in minor drama (posting a note to a message board threatens nobody) and to act in carelessly hurried manner.
Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
#530I think I do a good job of clarifying this in another comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14953580 I'll just copy paste the relevant portion here, to save most people a click: Say a company does one phone-interview, and if passed, moves on to on-sites. But for diverse candidates they do two phone interviews and if either passes they move on to on-sites. * Unqualified candidates always fail, since neither ph…
It says a great deal that some people won't concede that a company like Google doesn't have "hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for 'diversity' candidates" even if the author was much more politically correct in their verbiage.
Forgive me if I'm conflating two groups, but isn't it the same people saying Google is incapable of doing such a thing whom are also defending the practice of affirmative action at universities?
I don't understand how affirmative action is deemed acceptable and even encouraged and at universities to improve diversity numbers, but somehow it's inconceivable that a company like Google could lower the bar to hire employees whom have already had the bar lowered for them since the day they were accepted into college?