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

91–100 of 311 posts

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

#91

Post by loganfrederick »

Aqua wrote: post #83
loganfrederick wrote: post #79

I really liked Ben Horowitz's new book "What You Do Is Who You Are". However, the only passage that I disliked and stood out to me is when he defended David Drummond for his ability to thrive at Google for a long time despite the corporate culture changing. This was after Drummond was called out publicly for abandoning his kid he had with a subordinate: https://www.law.com/corpcounsel/2018/10/25/report-alphabet-c...…

That's not how business works.

You're correct, that's not how companies usually make their personnel decisions. But one would think more companies would factor in PR-risk as a real financial risk. But Google being Google economically-speaking, this still probably isn't a material event.

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

#92

Post by jacquesm »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #84
jacquesm wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The abuse of power is that he maneuvered her into a position of dependency, then bailed out and used the fact that she was now dependent on him against her.

Maneuvered implies intent. How do you know that was his intention from the start?

Well, it certainly didn't happen by accident. Fathers should support their kids, period.

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

#93

Post by freepor »

A true all-star in his profession. Managed to protect one of the most unethical businesses in technology history from any substantial legal/regulatory consequences. His tenure at Google is comparable to OJ Simpson’s unforgettable 1973 season for the Buffalo Bills.

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

#94

Post by cdumler »

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 requires no coercion, meaning that both parties are fully informed of all relevant information and both are in a legal capacity to do so. It is guaranteed that employees are not in a position to be fully informed because they will not have the same access to company information and employee resources.

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

#95

Post by hackinthebochs »

defen wrote: post #81
hackinthebochs wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is "evil" about not wanting to see a child that you presumably didn't want to begin with? A woman with an unwanted pregnancy can abort. Men don't have that option. But that doesn't obligate them to an emotional bond with the child.

> What is "evil" about not wanting to see a child that you presumably didn't want to begin with? The child doesn't get a choice about being brought into the world, so your desire or intent to produce a child is irrelevant. If you don't want to father a child, don't do anything that could reasonably lead to producing a child. If you father one anyway, that's on you. To deliberately alienate yourself from your child in…

And yet, we generally accept that women have the right to an abortion regardless of their willfully chosen actions prior. How do you square the two positions? Note that I'm not arguing that the man has a right to absolve himself of financial responsibility.

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

#96

Post by FireBeyond »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #65
jacquesm wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sp…

"One of us needs to leave. If you leave, I'll take care of you financially, since I'm making far more money here".

"Oh, you left, thanks. Oh, that financial help? I changed my mind about that".

It's possible to be abusive in a myriad of ways.

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

#97

Post by lanstin »

ProAm wrote: post #50
unapologetic wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This situation is fucked up on multiple levels. You don't punish the subordinate. Given his level, he should have been out. Instead they transferred her from legal to sales and her performance tanked because it was a job she was in no way qualified to do. He got her to quit (and sign a bunch of forms) promising to support her, then bailed. He refused child support and after she sued, he started using threats against…

He did not get her to quit, she made that choice herself because she wanted to protect him. She made that choice. Yes he is a terrible person, yes possibly psycho and this story sucks but no one forced anything. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him

Is rape the only thing that companies should fire people for? A pattern of relationships like this is quite likely to be very bad for Google, both in terms of settlements and in terms of lost morale and acceptance of shitty behavior instead of working together on the great common project. The question isn't "forced" it's "why is firing the subordinate done instead of firing the habitual asshole when it's clearly in the companies interests to fire the habitual asshole." And the answer to that question makes it plausible that Google has been protecting bad people at the cost of their idealistic but achievable missions.

Also, she may have made that choice, but also he "got" her to quit - not sure if you've been in a relationship, but both things can be true. Someone can influence you to make a bad choice. The responsibility for that bad choice then exists in both people.

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

#98

Post by johnhughesco »

ellard wrote: post #63
m0zg wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Did it occur that the employee might be attracted BECAUSE of the power discrepancy?

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

#99

Post by johnhughesco »

johnhughesco wrote: post #34
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.

Larry used to "date" Marissa Meyer. More like FOB

Why is stating facts downvoted on this crappy website?

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

#100

Post by lanstin »

oh_sigh wrote: post #57
jeffrallen wrote: post #49

Oh gross. Why can't powerful men behave themselves? Makes me grateful I'm not a powerful man.

Consider all of the powerful men who aren't forced out of their positions.

An argument that is less powerful with each passing decade.
Post reply on HN