SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the integrity-and-ethics-are-more-than-just-words dept.
Google employees will walk out on Thursday to protest company's
Days after a New York Times investigation revealed Google gave Android creator Andy Rubin a $90 million exit package despite multiple relationships with other Google staffers and accusations of sexual misconduct, some 200 employees at the search giant are planning a walkout, per BuzzFeed News.
We've reached out to Google for comment.
The walkout, or "women's walk," as it's been referred to in internal company forums, is planned for Thursday.
Following the NYT report, Google chief executive officer Sundar Pichai and its vice president of people operations Eileen Naughton co-signed a company memo admitting that 48 people had been terminated at the company for sexual harassment in the past two years, 13 of which held a senior management position or higher. None of them, according to the memo, received an exit package.
[...] Rubin left Google in 2014 after an internal investigation found accusations of sexual misconduct against him to be credible. The details of his exit, however, were never disclosed. It wasn't until The Information published its own bombshell report on Rubin's wrongdoings last fall that details of his history of sexual harassment began to emerge. In the wake of The Information's story, Rubin took a leave of absence from Essential to "deal with personal matters."
See also: Google is 'bold and inspired' for coming clean about its 'Game of Thrones' culture of sex and power
Update: Alphabet exec Rich DeVaul resigns after harassment allegation
Just days after a New York Times report dug into sexual misconduct by executives within Google and its parent company Alphabet, one of the men named has resigned. Rich DeVaul was a director of Alphabet's X research division (formerly known as Google X), and cofounded Project Loon. As first reported by Axios, DeVaul resigned, and did not receive an exit package.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 31 2018, @04:55PM (11 children)
It'd be nice for Google's competitors, but it would be a stupid move for any public-facing company.
Note: Never take PR advice from SoylentNews.
(Score: 5, Touché) by Snow on Wednesday October 31 2018, @05:03PM (2 children)
It would be a bad PR move, but what would be actual impact be?
Are people going to start using Bing? Boycott YouTube? lolno
(Score: 5, Interesting) by sjames on Wednesday October 31 2018, @08:37PM
There was probably a discussion similar at SGI's headquarters. Then disgruntled SGI engineers left and started Nvidia.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday November 01 2018, @03:16PM
If Google served fried infant body parts in the cafeteria at lunch time, I still wouldn't use Bing. The duck, on the other hand . . . you bet!
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 31 2018, @05:19PM (5 children)
I always kept mine away from Google because they catalogue you, file you, and advertise at you. I hate advertising -- I'm not a wallet.
I qualify fairly readily, but I am absolutely against going to work for Google. It has always been the thought, "Work for the largest advertising corporation in the United States?..... no, thanks."
With the recent news of all of this "Throw any man, _all_ men under the bus, because a woman was uncomfortable with normal human contact and a simple question off work premises who then saught to use that encounter to attack the company, so we the company will cowtow to their demands and more,"* just strikes another nail in the coffin. This shit is catastrophic. Google will not remain a large organization. They're killing themselves. It would be stupid to go to work there, as a male.
* DeVaul's story is that he met a woman at Burning Man and made a sexual advance, as is _normal_ of humans. Presumably this was accompanied by talk of who he was, where he worked, the fact that he held a director position at this company. Standard small-talk of successful humans in wooing another human. He _requested_ a sexual advance, and was turned down; he then took a lesser approach which still suggested interest, not simply walking away -> if at first you don't succeed, giving up is what the weak do.
The woman goes, 'oh, hey -- a director at Google was interested in me! We talked a lot, we do similar things, and he complemented my skills!' - likely this was part of the smalltalk/wooing above. The woman, having rejected the man, to apply for work at Google, using this sexually-charged event, for a similar role as they'd talked about - a role that it was stated is managed by said director. Other employees didn't feel great with the candidate, but you don't end the day early, you still have a candidate to interview. So the interview took place, the director walked in and goes, "Oh -- her." he can't leave the interview at that point, that would be most insulting. So the interview continues, having started after other interviewers were uncomfortable with the candidate's abilities anyway. It's a formality. Something that's on the agenda for the day.
When the candidate is formally rejected after the day is out and the discussions had taken place, the candidate cries foul over an event that happened off company time, off company property, at an event not sponsored by or in any way related to the company. The director, then, loses his job.
This seems like a clear case of an attack by a feminist. Based on the offense of being asked a question and away from anything related to the situation, the woman used a known conflict of interest to attempt to advance herself. The company responded to this inappropriate contuct of the candidate (black mail? bribery? Sexual harrassment? - using someone else's expression of interest to try and get them to hire you) by cowtowing to any mere accusation of offense, the creation of a conflict of interest by an external entity, because whocaresaboutmen.
This is sexual harrassment on the part of Google, ousting this director because of normal human interactions that he made in his own time. This is sexual harrassment. This will come to an end, and Google will find itself on the wrong side when law is applied equally across the board.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 31 2018, @05:42PM
Google will always have a steady supply of millennial soy boys willing to work for it. Some of them will even be competent programmers.
Google and other large companies will continue to get thousands of job applications for every position. And they can import H-1Bs to increase the desperation of the millennials.
Google can throw men under the #MeToo bus and it won't matter. That's what their employees say they want, even if some keep their real opinions to themselves.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by crafoo on Wednesday October 31 2018, @11:24PM
Spoilers: the law will not be applied equally across the board.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Bobs on Thursday November 01 2018, @10:06AM (1 child)
No.
In any well-run, competently run organization, you prevent/manage fraternization between people with hiring/firing/promotion authority.
If he was a military general running a boot camp and asked one of the recruits under his command, while off base, if they would have sex with him, that would be a problem. If that person was in the process of requesting transfer into his unit, and he asked them to have sex, that would be a problem.
If you are a university professor don’t screw with ‘your’ students or with juniors in your field.
It would also be a problem if s/he asked one of these people to pay him money or give him a ‘loan’.
With power comes responsibility. If you can’t handle the responsibility of not asking every random person you encounter for sex, then you shouldn’t have the power in the organization to oversee a bunch of people. All you need to have is enough control of yourself to only proposition every person who doesn’t work in your field under you. There are plenty of fish in the sea. Don’t fuck with the crew.
The gender of the people doesn’t matter. If it is for sex or not doesn’t matter. It is an abuse of power to ask for externalities from people under you. It messes up organizational function, morale, and is ripe for abuse or the appearance thereof.
And if a person can’t handle that responsibility then they shouldn’t be a leader in the organization.
(Score: 3, Touché) by tangomargarine on Thursday November 01 2018, @06:43PM
Yeah okay, that would be relevant if it happened after the woman was hired at the company.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 01 2018, @04:16PM
how much of this is true?
its a great story though. it ties into what we want to read here. but it seems really biased and one sided with conclusions that have no supporting merits.
what part of no doesn't mean no? i mean even if you are high and trying to woo someone with your wallet size and ego. he doesnt get a pass beacuse even trump paid stormy. he didnt offer this chick anything except his dick. and he apparently persisted.
just because he has a dick and she has a hole doesnt mean the natural order of things is to get high and fuck because you said so.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday November 01 2018, @09:29AM (1 child)
Oh, come on! SoylentNews is better than Netcraft! Just look: Gab is dead, SoylentNews confirms it!
See? that works, no?
(Score: 2) by RandomFactor on Thursday November 01 2018, @10:15AM
Gab is 'no-platformed' according to the landing page
but, like the leper in that Monty Python skit ("I'm not dead yet!")
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды