SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Alphabet, shareholders settle in lawsuits over sexual harassment at Google:
Investors sued after one exec accused of misconduct was compensated $240M to leave.
Alphabet, Google's parent company, said today it has settled a set of shareholder lawsuits related to the company's handling of sexual harassment claims. Alphabet will commit $310 million to corporate diversity programs over the next decade, and the company agreed to allow its board to take on a greater oversight role in misconduct cases.
As part of the new agreement, Alphabet will expand on its current policy of "prohibiting severance for anyone terminated for any form of misconduct," to include anyone who is currently under investigation for "sexual misconduct or retaliation," Google VP of People Operations Eileen Naughton said in a company blog post.
[...] The lawsuits followed reports finding that three top Google executives who left the company amid allegations of misconduct got to leave quietly with massive compensation packages. Android creator Andy Rubin was given a $150 million stock grant, as well as a $90 million severance package, when he was ushered out of the company in 2014 after Google determined a sexual misconduct complaint against him was credible.
See also: The New York Times.
Makes Google's "Do no evil." mantra of the past, seem quaint.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Tuesday September 29 2020, @08:16AM (8 children)
"do no evil" - noble, optimistic, delusional - bur it was only ever branding, anyway.
Now we have the more realistic "do anything you like, just don't get caught" that all companies use in place of real ethics.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Tuesday September 29 2020, @10:25AM (6 children)
Past a certain point, it is the nature of capitalism to inject "evil". Capitalism subordinate everything else to "show me the growth percentage", there's a finite amount to show so that sooner or later you get the demanded exponential growth (or else...) to outstrip your capacity of acting moral.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @10:38AM (5 children)
This sexual harrassment had nothing to do with "making the numbers" under capitalism.
It's a human failing due to the hormones. This would happen in a church, communist country, or a small island with one tribe. The payoff was a desire to hush up the affair which is also something that would happen in any large organization. The fact that the amount of the payoff was so large is because Google is unbelievably rich.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday September 29 2020, @10:49AM (2 children)
No, sexual harassment has nothing to do, the "golden parachute" has.
You see, to get Android started/completed (or something on the same line), you may need to hire brilliant minds with a crappy character (remember Hans Reiser?).
If you don't hire that guy, your competitors may, so offering a "golden parachute" may make the difference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @12:02PM (1 child)
Again, not capitalism per se.
"Important" people are protected in any organization: a school, business, etc.
One of the main functions of the organization is to protect itself.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Tuesday September 29 2020, @12:31PM
We may quibble on "per se".
Maybe capitalism is not the only one, but protecting/advancing sociopaths because building wealth is the purpose (not the mean) is a thing that happens frequently in capitalism. Because being a sociopath does provide advantages in capitalistic cultures.
If you want an example of orgs/culture that don't put money above anything else, take Mondragon [wikipedia.org], or the kibbutzim [wikipedia.org]. I never heard of any being described as "an evil organization" the way one hears frequent enough about top dog corporations in capitalism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Tuesday September 29 2020, @02:33PM (1 child)
I think the two are connected.
- Aggressive personalities are rewarded / make more $ than kinder gentler people. That's all throughout capitalist business, from corporate political hierarchy to sole proprieters.
- Aggression is quite correlated with testosterone. Notice I did not say it's a 1:1 cause:effect, so disputing me by citing 1 exception doesn't cut the logic mustard.
I don't think I need to connect any more dots- the results should be obvious.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @07:30PM
Let me recap: 1) Doubtful assertion 1. 2) Assertion 1 is double-dare true.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @06:07PM
"Do no evil" means "DON'T EMPLOY FEMALES".
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @08:26AM
Policy changed from "Paying severance even if guilty," to "Withhold severance if guilty, pay if not" to the new woke standard, "Everyone is guilty, even if innocent."
Of course, only executives ever got the severance anyway. I'd just as soon see it go away entirely. This is not, however, a step on the way to that.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 29 2020, @09:44AM (6 children)
It is never a good idea to reward bad conduct. Will corporate America take the hint, and stop with all the golden parachutes? Multi-million dollar bonuses are bad enough, when conduct is good. Running a company into the ground, or dallying with the hired help should never be rewarded.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Tuesday September 29 2020, @10:29AM (5 children)
Show me a business reason for which they should.
Business are under no obligation to act moral, just to act legal and, especially for corporations, to make an ever increasing amount of money.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 29 2020, @10:54AM (2 children)
Fiduciary duty to stockholders seems like a business reason to do so. Google has set an example here, even if they were forced to do so.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday September 29 2020, @10:58AM (1 child)
Business contracts (hiring contracts among them) are laws between parts.
Duties are subordinated to laws.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Tuesday September 29 2020, @02:54PM
Your premise that laws are clear, complete, and final is a false assumption (esp. in US).
The fact that a case can be solidly lost at one level, then appealed and solidly won at the next court level, kind of proves the legal system is very very gray and mushy.
I've had to deal with the legal system a bunch over the past 3 years. Haven't yet "brought action", but have talked to many authorities and lawyers and often get a very different story from each. Sometimes a particular lawyer has given me an opposite answer a month or two later.
Sadly it's not about solid facts and logic, but much more about presentation and theatrics and interpretation- especially when the "evidence" isn't factual and concrete, but mostly verbal testimony.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Tuesday September 29 2020, @02:38PM (1 child)
Because:
1) the direct financial losses of a lawsuit (lawyers, court fees, PR costs),
2) far worse if they lose (lawyers, fines, court fees, PR costs)
3) and the damage to reputation which pretty much always hurts profits.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday September 29 2020, @03:14PM
All of those start to fade in importance as you walk your way up on the "Fortune X-hundred" scale of behemoths - the balance of power is too skewed in their favour.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Tuesday September 29 2020, @09:50AM (2 children)
They were unhappy about blowing the 240, so now they're going to blow an additional 310?
That's not an expansion. By any reasonable interpretation, the old policy was already broad enough to include the redundant part that they want to add. Unless they intend to terminate people solely for being "under investigation"
The goog execs, the investors, and their respective lawyers all need tickets for the B ark.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Tuesday September 29 2020, @02:59PM
Seems obvious- they're trying to 1) improve their image / PR, and 2) stave off future losses due to misconduct, which could be much more than $310M.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday September 29 2020, @04:44PM
Yeah, how is spending $310M on "diversity programs" going to help with wasting $240M on ridiculous severance packages for sexual harassers? These severance packages came from the top; no diversity program or any other employee training course is going to help with that. It's not like some random HR employee is the one that approved the $240M package.
Why aren't they giving $240M to the person who was harassed anyway? In fact, the person who was wronged should be getting paid out much more than the person who did it. How about $1-3 billion for the victim?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by looorg on Tuesday September 29 2020, @10:25AM (1 child)
What is sexual retaliation? Sounds kinda kinky.
Sounds like some kind of new get out of employment free-card, after all since you can now apparently commit some kind of misconduct without even knowing it. They seem to invent new violations on a near daily basis over at HR.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @03:02PM
You'll have to talk to Lorena Bobbitt. But keep your distance, of course.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @01:54PM (1 child)
legalized shakedown
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @07:32PM
im down if you shake
(Score: 3, Funny) by darkfeline on Tuesday September 29 2020, @08:01PM
> Alphabet will commit $310 million to corporate diversity programs
Eh? How does corporate diversity help with sexual harassment?
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!