Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Googler Says She was Fired for Telling Colleagues about Worker Rights

posted by martyb on Wednesday December 18 2019, @01:34AM   Printer-friendly
from the with-great-responsibility dept.

Freeman writes:

Kathryn Spiers says Google terminated her after she created a browser tool to notify employees of their organizing rights.

[...] Back in September, Google reached a settlement with the NLRB over earlier alleged violations of federal labor law. Under the settlement, Google was required to post a list of employee rights in its Mountain View headquarters.

[...] So when Google hired a consulting company known for its anti-union work, Spiers wrote a notification that would appear whenever Google employees visited the firm's website. The notification stated that "Googlers have the right to participate in protected concerted activities." That's a legal term of art for worker organizing efforts. It also included a link to the worker rights notification mandated by the NLRB settlement.

[...] Two weeks later, on December 13, Spiers was fired.

[...] The complaint argues that her firing was an "attempt to quell Spiers and other employees from asserting their right to engage in concerted protected activities."

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/12/engineer-says-google-fired-her-for-browser-pop-up-about-worker-rights/

Previous stories:
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=19/12/04/0029250
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=19/11/26/1411249

Seems like a pattern of abuse to me. Just not necessarily by the employees.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Googler Says She was Fired for Telling Colleagues about Worker Rights | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 74 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday December 18 2019, @01:55AM (6 children)

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday December 18 2019, @01:55AM (#933527) Journal

    Wasn't she fired for making a pop-up?

    Regardless the message, a pop-up is a pop-up

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by c0lo on Wednesday December 18 2019, @02:10AM (4 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 18 2019, @02:10AM (#933535) Journal

    Wasn't she fired for making a pop-up?

    No, she was fired for not running that pop-up through her manager's approval.
    Other sources [engadget.com] suggest the popup is the usual way deploying notifications for Googlers and it was part of her job to make/deploy such popups.

    In a post on Medium, Spiers says that Google was recently forced to a publish a list (by the NLRB), internally, outlining the rights its employees have. And in order to ensure that all affected employees knew about it, Spiers added a pop-up notification to the company's internal Chrome browser. Apparently this is a common practice inside the company, allowing people to share "hobbies or interests" with their co-workers.
    ...
    Update: Google executive Royal Hansen explained Spiers' firing in an email Google shared [engadget.com] with several media outlets.

    "She misused a security and privacy tool to create a pop-up that was neither about security nor privacy," Hansen wrote. "She did that without authorization from her team or the Security and Privacy Policy Notifier team, and without a business justification. And she used an emergency rapid push to do it."

    Hansen argued that the firing had nothing to do with the content of the message. "The decision would have been the same had the pop-up message been on any other subject," he argued.

    So, here you have it straight from the horse's mouth [medium.com]

    This kind of code change happens all the time. We frequently add things to make our jobs easier or even to just share hobbies or interests. For example, someone changed the default desktop wallpaper during the walkout last year so that the Linux penguin was holding a protest sign. The company has never reacted aggressively in response to a notification such as this in the past. It’s always been a celebrated part of the culture.

    During my time on the security team, I’ve had many conversations about the importance of maintaining user trust. My code — a small notification about employee rights — does not reduce trust. What does is the Director of Detection and Response signing a letter falsely accusing four of my coworkers. Or the fact that upper management is trying to use the security team to investigate employees and their organizing activity. A less transparent Google is a less trustworthy Google.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 18 2019, @07:15AM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 18 2019, @07:15AM (#933640)

      That doesn't sound like it would be a firing offense for someone who wasn't mouthy in other aspects of his job.

      • (Score: 5, Informative) by c0lo on Wednesday December 18 2019, @08:22AM (2 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 18 2019, @08:22AM (#933658) Journal

        That doesn't sound like it would be a firing offense for someone who wasn't mouthy in other aspects of his job.

        In all jobs that I worked, the "three strikes unless unlawful" rule was followed. Even when stepping outside the company's policies, first time was always a warning especially if the blunder has been reversible and with no impact on the company's market.
        This one reeks of "make an example of the fuckers".

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

        • (Score: 2) by Pino P on Wednesday December 18 2019, @03:31PM

          by Pino P (4721) on Wednesday December 18 2019, @03:31PM (#933746) Journal

          In all jobs that I worked, the "three strikes unless unlawful" rule was followed.

          The public might have to wait for the wrongful termination trial to figure out what the employee's other two strikes were, and why they didn't wear off. On YouTube, a video hosting service operated by the same company, a strike wears off after three months of consecutive good behavior.

        • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday December 18 2019, @06:45PM

          by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday December 18 2019, @06:45PM (#933836) Journal

          In all jobs that I worked, the "three strikes unless unlawful" rule was followed.

          That was also the rule for the Teamsters at the steel mill I worked at.

          Anyone who says you can't fire union people is lying. I know, I've done it.

  • (Score: 5, Touché) by takyon on Wednesday December 18 2019, @02:13AM

    by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Wednesday December 18 2019, @02:13AM (#933537) Journal

    "She misused a security and privacy tool to create a pop-up that was neither about security nor privacy," Hansen wrote. "She did that without authorization from her team or the Security and Privacy Policy Notifier team, and without a business justification. And she used an emergency rapid push to do it."

    Hansen argued that the firing had nothing to do with the content of the message. "The decision would have been the same had the pop-up message been on any other subject," he argued.

    That's what they claim.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]