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

Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 311 posts

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#61

Post by m0zg »

pinewurst wrote: post #31
thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've heard it already. They literally had a "masseuse room" where Sergey would have sex with employees inside the Google building.

Quote from link above: "HR told me that Sergey's response to it was, 'Why not? They're my employees,'" Ayers said. "But you don't have employees for f---ing! That's not what the job is."

I might be wrong, but I don't think there's any law that forbids having consensual sex with employees. It's unethical if they're his direct reports, sure, but I don't think it's illegal. I'm sure if I had _fifty billion dollars_, I'd have to fight off women like zombies in a movie even though I'm already married.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#62

Post by stronglikedan »

d1zzy wrote: post #59
stronglikedan wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why can't powerful men behave themselves? They can behave themselves equally as well as not-powerful men, but they're just in more of a spotlight.

I think it's more than that, powerful/rich people men are going to have more access to (consensual) sex than poor men.

But if it's consensual, then they are behaving themselves.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#63

Post by ellard »

m0zg wrote: post #61
pinewurst wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quote from link above: "HR told me that Sergey's response to it was, 'Why not? They're my employees,'" Ayers said. "But you don't have employees for f---ing! That's not what the job is."

I might be wrong, but I don't think there's any law that forbids having consensual sex with employees. It's unethical if they're his direct reports, sure, but I don't think it's illegal. I'm sure if I had _fifty billion dollars_, I'd have to fight off women like zombies in a movie even though I'm already married.

Consent is murky at best when there's a large power discrepancy between two co-workers. See: everything that's been going on with Hollywood in the past couple of years

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#64

Post by EForEndeavour »

thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: post #27
lacker wrote: post #11

These sexual misconduct investigations at Google are really finding some critical stuff. At this point my guess is that it is related to the Larry and Sergey resignations, and we will eventually hear information that reflects poorly on them directly.

We've heard it already. They literally had a "masseuse room" where Sergey would have sex with employees inside the Google building.

This phrasing is a bit misleading. It makes it sound like Sergey had designated a room exclusively for sex with employees and called it the "masseuse room." To be precise, Google's offices include private massage rooms in which employees can get professional massages. Sergey allegedly had sex in one or more of these rooms.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#65

Post by hackinthebochs »

jacquesm wrote: post #37
ProAm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is a woman who entered a relationship and it didnt work out. Ive definitely read it and this is not a #metoo story. He didnt force himself up on, he didnt take advantage of her, he didnt threaten her, he didnt demand she date him, it's about dating someone at work when there are clear rules around it. No one said she had to leave the department, but that one of them would have to leave. It's a tragically sa…

Well, then maybe you read the story but did not understand it. That's fine with me, but I did read the story and that is not my takeaway at all. For starters, there is a clear abuse of power here with one party being the senior person at the company suggesting that things will be 'ok' when clearly there was a plan all along to create a situation of asymmetry and dependency, followed up with a lot of very mean and man…

I don't get this "abuse of power" angle at all. Having a relationship with a subordinate is not an abuse of power. Insisting that your job rests on a relationship is an abuse of power, but without evidence that happened (and it seems like it didnt), there's no abuse. This idea that a power differential invalidates a relationship is nonsense.

The fact is, people spend half or more of their waking hours at work. You spend more time with your colleagues than you do your own family in many cases. Relationship are going to happen. We need to learn how to deal with it rather than try to codify rules against it.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#66

Post by ProAm »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #52
ProAm wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She was forced out because it was against company policy. She wasnt forced out of google, but to a different department. And she voluntarily quit google, she was never fired. It's a sad story, but it's just adults making their own decisions that don't work out. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him

And David wasn't forced out for violating company policy because...? He's a man? He's Larry and Sergey's friend?

No one was forced out, HR said one of them had to leave. We dont know anything beyond that she was the one to change departments. She wasnt fired.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#67

Post by thrwn_frthr_awy »

EForEndeavour wrote: post #64
thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've heard it already. They literally had a "masseuse room" where Sergey would have sex with employees inside the Google building.

This phrasing is a bit misleading. It makes it sound like Sergey had designated a room exclusively for sex with employees and called it the "masseuse room." To be precise, Google's offices include private massage rooms in which employees can get professional massages. Sergey allegedly had sex in one or more of these rooms.

> It makes it sound like Sergey had designated a room exclusively for sex with employees and called it the "masseuse room."

Yes, it does sound like that. I'd advise all people in leadership to avoid conduct that could be interpreted this way.

Edit: Thank you jacquesm for fixing my freudian slip :)

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#68

Post by damnyou »

m0zg wrote: post #61
pinewurst wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quote from link above: "HR told me that Sergey's response to it was, 'Why not? They're my employees,'" Ayers said. "But you don't have employees for f---ing! That's not what the job is."

I might be wrong, but I don't think there's any law that forbids having consensual sex with employees. It's unethical if they're his direct reports, sure, but I don't think it's illegal. I'm sure if I had _fifty billion dollars_, I'd have to fight off women like zombies in a movie even though I'm already married.

Yes, it's probably not illegal, but it should still cause the exec to be fired.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#69

Post by nostrademons »

m0zg wrote: post #61
pinewurst wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quote from link above: "HR told me that Sergey's response to it was, 'Why not? They're my employees,'" Ayers said. "But you don't have employees for f---ing! That's not what the job is."

I might be wrong, but I don't think there's any law that forbids having consensual sex with employees. It's unethical if they're his direct reports, sure, but I don't think it's illegal. I'm sure if I had _fifty billion dollars_, I'd have to fight off women like zombies in a movie even though I'm already married.

There's no criminal law against it, but it opens you up to civil suits from aggrieved parties (who can be either participants in the affair or bystanders who feel they were given a raw deal because of the relationship). Hiring, firing, and performance management is supposed to be based on your performance at doing your job, not because your boss dumped you and now dislikes you. Sexual harassment and discrimination suits are both relatively easy to document and tend to be viewed sympathetically by juries.

Re: Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer Stepping Down Amid Investigation

#70

Post by ProAm »

unapologetic wrote: post #51
ProAm wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did he force onto her?

Well she's stuck raising the son of an emotionally abusive sociopath. Besides that he pressured her into quitting with promises of financial support, then left her with the baby and refused to pay. I can't even comprehend the type of person who doesn't see the cruelty of this man. She trusted the wrong person, that doesn't justify his behavior.

I agree hes probably a terrible person, but I just dont see where he is abusing his power at Google. He didn't pressure her into a relationship, he didnt force himself upon her, didnt threaten her job if she didnt cooperate, he didnt pressure her into leaving, she even says so in the article. These both sound like people of poor judgement, I just dont see the abuse people are trying to levy.

> so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him

Post reply on HN