Google facing Employee Power


AyaanMyHero

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
567
Google employees walked out of multiple work sites today (including the Dublin site) demanding the following:



Here is an article with some context.

Google staff walk out over women's treatment - BBC News

One could conclude Google is a nasty place to work since they seem to treat alleged harassment victims quite badly and the alleged harassers quite well.

Not sure if that is the right conclusion. They have led the way in good treatment of employees in other ways (pay, perks, free food, everyone wants to work there). They fired James Damore to show support for women in the company. Many other tech companies would not have done that. One of Damores points was that the environment was a bit too strong on affirmative action as an attempt to progress the careers of women.

The list of demands strikes me as a mixed bag.

One question: Putting yourself in a CEOs shoes: which of the demands are reasonable and which are not ?

Second question: This was bound to happen one day or another. But why does this first arise in Google ? What makes them more susceptible to it.

Third question: put yourself in a shareholders shoes: do you feel more safe or less safe in your investment due to this ?

Fourth question: put yourself in an employees shoes, does this occurrence encourage you to stay or leave ?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
224,670
Take the chief diversity officer out and shoot them.
Lesson over, the old ways are best.

Now, get back to work you muppets.
 

flavirostris

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Messages
25,129
I saw this on Sky News earlier. But I find it bizarre as Google has a reputation for extreme political correctness, diversity hiring etc.

The idea of Google being hounded for sexual harrassment seems shocking, given their reputation for leftwing, equality culture.
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
15,794
and they said all the crazy campus stuff wouldnt affect the real world. lol
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
11,208
Google employees walked out of multiple work sites today (including the Dublin site) demanding the following:





[...]
Points 1 and 4 are mutually exclusive. You can have equal opportunity or you can have a diversity officer but you can't have both.

Point 3 is appalling. Anonymous denunciations are the stuff of police states and dystopias.
 

jmcc

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
41,929
I saw this on Sky News earlier. But I find it bizarre as Google has a reputation for extreme political correctness, diversity hiring etc.

The idea of Google being hounded for sexual harrassment seems shocking, given their reputation for leftwing, equality culture.
They have a dark side. The former head of Search was left go due to such issues. He signed up with another company and neglected to explain why he left Google. The other company fired him. Google needs easily regimented people for most of its day to day operations. Valuable employees are valuable and it would probably want to hang on to them.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
224,670
Points 1 and 4 are mutually exclusive. You can have equal opportunity or you can have a diversity officer but you can't have both.

Point 3 is appalling. Anonymous denunciations are the stuff of police states and dystopias.
But no, absolutely not, these would very largely be women making anonymous accusations against men, therefore and obviously abuse of such a system just couldn't arise.

The very thought, do you not trust women or what's your problem. You're a man, aren't you?
Go on, admit it!
 

flavirostris

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Messages
25,129
They have a dark side. The former head of Search was left go due to such issues. He signed up with another company and neglected to explain why he left Google. The other company fired him. Google needs easily regimented people for most of its day to day operations. Valuable employees are valuable and it would probably want to hang on to them.
They have a certain 'culture' in there which is quite weird. You have to be a 'Google person' to get hired there and that means buying into their culture of political correctness, diversity, pride and so on.

For that reason, I tend to think they hire people who are more easily malleable from their point of view. They don't really like independent thinkers. You have to be a bit 'soy' to get into Google basically.

NPC only hiring policy.
 

jmcc

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
41,929
They have a certain 'culture' in there which is quite weird. You have to be a 'Google person' to get hired there and that means buying into their culture of political correctness, diversity, pride and so on.
Yep. It is rather campus-like in many respects. It seems much like a playground for the types who would be made P.ie mods but they would be somewhat smarter.

For that reason, I tend to think they hire people who are more easily malleable from their point of view. They don't really like independent thinkers. You have to be a bit 'soy' to get into Google basically.
Some Google people are quite sound. A lot of things went badly wrong with Google over the years but this isn't really the thread for it. The key players in any company will be given a lot more leeway than some normal hire. Genius is rare. The kind of happy-clappy drone that can do the daily tasks is not. Third Level just churns them out. Buying off complainants is a lot cheaper than losing key players. It may sound cynical but that's how business works.
 
Last edited:

AyaanMyHero

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
567
and they said all the crazy campus stuff wouldnt affect the real world. lol
The leftist masterplanners must love this as the plague incubated in Californian campuses spreads to workplaces across the world.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,872
They fired James Damore to show support for women in the company.
They didn't. They fired him because he was an idiot.

Many other tech companies would not have done that.
Literally every multinational would have fired Damore for writing what he wrote

The list of demands strikes me as a mixed bag.

One question: Putting yourself in a CEOs shoes: which of the demands are reasonable and which are not ?
Point 1: Sure. Every company is committed to this. And it's not hard to do, but it can be expensive. You look at people's performance ratings, you look at the average, you even things out. So if you have 1000 people at X level with the same performance rating, there should be a broad equivalence in pay and bonuses. If there's a statistical anomaly where one race/gender is getting significantly less or more than others, then that's to be addressed.

Point 2: Sure within reason. They won't CALL it that of course. You stick a page into the diversity report on it. And it will just be statistics, it's not going to be "Person X was sacked for assault" etc.

Point 3: Jesus yes. They don't have that? That's ridiculous.

Point 4: Sure. Why not. Can't hurt, good optics.

Point 5: Sure. Why not. Can't hurt, good optics.

Point 6: Uh. Yeah there shouldn't be "Forced arbitration" for conduct issues. Like...if someone was stealing you wouldn't arbitrate. ou take disciplinary action. I would be surprised though if Google have forced arbitration.

Second question: This was bound to happen one day or another. But why does this first arise in Google ? What makes them more susceptible to it.
Heavily liberal, young workforce who are used to taking big steps that won't put up with platitudes people in other industries would.

Third question: put yourself in a shareholders shoes: do you feel more safe or less safe in your investment due to this ?
Couldn't care less, shouldn't impact anyone's thoughts.

Fourth question: put yourself in an employees shoes, does this occurrence encourage you to stay or leave ?
Wouldn't impact anyone's thoughts. What happens afterwards would.
 

AyaanMyHero

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
567
Points 1 and 4 are mutually exclusive. You can have equal opportunity or you can have a diversity officer but you can't have both.

Point 3 is appalling. Anonymous denunciations are the stuff of police states and dystopias.
Agree with you on points 1 and 4. This diversity stuff is really bad for business. I know of a certain Swedish company that is fast tracking women into leadership positions before they are ready. Disaster awaits. I know of another Finnish company that tries to force its suppliers to have a diversity strategy, set goals and report regularly on progress. It is becoming part of the business world.

On point 3, my own employer (4000 employees) has a system for anonymously reporting harassment. Since it is really anonymous, you never hear names of the accused or the accusers. Investigations involve only those that need to be involved. I never had anyone tell me anything about these investigations. It's as if there are not so many investigations. In 20 years, I only know of one person that left the company where rumour was that it was due to a harassment case.

Point 3, I see no harm in. In fact, I am surprised Google don't have that one covered already.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

PBP voter

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 18, 2015
Messages
8,979
How many of the workers all around the world who walked out are in a Union?

They have feck all power and they know it.

No Union. No power.


Google is just full of sheep who only care about their own pay. Fair enough if that's your view. But stop these fake protests. It just damages other workers.
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
11,472
I saw this on Sky News earlier. But I find it bizarre as Google has a reputation for extreme political correctness, diversity hiring etc.

The idea of Google being hounded for sexual harrassment seems shocking, given their reputation for leftwing, equality culture.
I visited one of their offices in California and it was notable how many more women work there (in that location at least) than most Silicon Valley tech firms.
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
11,208
Agree with you on points 1 and 4. This diversity stuff is really bad for business. I know of a certain Swedish company that is fast tracking women into leadership positions before they are ready. Disaster awaits. I know of another Finnish company that tries to force its suppliers to have a diversity strategy, set goals and report regularly on progress. It is becoming part of the business world.

On point 3, my own employer (4000 employees) has a system for anonymously reporting harassment. Since it is really anonymous, you never hear names of the accused or the accusers. Investigations involve only those that need to be involved. I never had anyone tell me anything about these investigations. It's as if there are not so many investigations. In 20 years, I only know of one person that left the company where rumour was that it was due to a harassment case.

Point 3, I see no harm in. In fact, I am surprised Google don't have that one covered already.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
When the accuser is anonymous then no one hears her name. Even the accused can't be told so he's denied justice. No matter how the 'investigation' goes, and it wouldn't look good to have too many of them exonerating the accused, the denunciation will always be on the record of the accused and must inevitably affect his career.

If it's not already illegal then it should be made so.
 

balisong

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
379
It's actually funny to see this happen to Google

They thought they were scoring progressive points by embracing these loons and they were not smart enough to realise that this lot will always turn on their allies because it is NEVER enough. I reckon they will do serious damage to Google over the next few years. Talented male staff are going too figure out that working for a company where your career and reputation can be ruined by any anonymous allegation is a bad move.

Note the demand that the diversity officer be made answerable to no one but the CEO. That's a play to be given free reign to conduct a witch hunt.
 

fifilawe

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
1,366
All current Tech Giants are about to be overtaken by Web 3.0 as the creators of the DWEB(Decentralised Web are constructing the "personal free web " which is going to wrestle the power of the current giants g*******e, F********, etc just follow these links if you are to be convinced Beaker Browser , http://www.inrupt.com , Graphite , .

see the project Sir Tim Berners-Lee is launchig to be the web of the next giant leap forward in the web at solid.mit.edu
 
Last edited:

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
51,862
Well I welcome it insofar as its about stopping sexual harrassment. But I dont define sexual harrassment as a one-off flirtation based on misreading signals. I think sometimes that does get lumped in with the concept of sexual harrassment.

its interesting that a woman at the protest today who was making a speech said she herself was not a victim of sexual harrassment.

I think Facebook has a rule can you can ask a work colleague out only once.
 
Top