Google staff walk out over women's treatment

unchanged_lineup

Tarheel Tech Wizard
Joined
Aug 9, 2014
Messages
16,757
Location
Leaving A Breakfast On All Of Your Doorsteps
Supports
Janet jazz jazz jam
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-46054202

Staff at Google offices around the world are staging an unprecedented series of walkouts in protest at the company's treatment of women.

The employees are demanding several key changes in how sexual misconduct allegations are dealt with at the firm, including a call to end forced arbitration - a move which would make it possible for victims to sue.

Anger at the firm has boiled over in the past week since it emerged one high profile executive received a $90m payout after he left the firm, despite what Google considered a “credible” allegation of sexual misconduct made against him. Andy Rubin, known as the “creator” of the Android mobile operating system, denies the allegation.

Staff involved in Thursday's walkout will leave a note on their desks telling colleagues: "I’m not at my desk because I’m walking out with other Googlers and contractors to protest sexual harassment, misconduct, lack of transparency, and a workplace culture that’s not working for everyone."

They are also making formal demands to Google’s management. They are:

  1. An end to forced arbitration in cases of harassment and discrimination for all current and future employees;
  2. A commitment to end pay and opportunity inequality;
  3. A publicly disclosed sexual harassment transparency report;
  4. A clear, uniform, globally inclusive process for reporting sexual misconduct safely and anonymously;
  5. The elevation of the chief diversity officer to answer directly to the CEO, and make recommendations directly to the board of directors;
  6. The appointment of an employee representative to the board.
 

Massive Spanner

Give Mason Mount a chance!
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
27,890
Location
Tool shed
I know a few people who work in the Dublin office and it sounds like the best place to work ever so I guess if they've nothing else to worry about, they may as well.
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
33,113
So they paid Rubin off rather than just firing him. What the hell?
 

11101

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
21,202
So they paid Rubin off rather than just firing him. What the hell?
They can't fire him if nothing is proven against him, the article says it was just an allegation. Much easier to pay him enough that he just leaves.
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
33,113
They can't fire him if nothing is proven against him, the article says it was just an allegation. Much easier to pay him enough that he just leaves.
I was more going by the article bbc linked to

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-andy-rubin.html


SAN FRANCISCO — Google gave Andy Rubin, the creator of Android mobile software, a hero’s farewell when he left the company in October 2014.

“I want to wish Andy all the best with what’s next,” Larry Page, Google’s chief executive then, said in a public statement. “With Android he created something truly remarkable — with a billion-plus happy users.”

What Google did not make public was that an employee had accused Mr. Rubin of sexual misconduct. The woman, with whom Mr. Rubin had been having an extramarital relationship, said he coerced her into performing oral sex in a hotel room in 2013, according to two company executives with knowledge of the episode. Google investigated and concluded her claim was credible, said the people, who spoke on the condition that they not be named, citing confidentiality agreements. Mr. Rubin was notified, they said, and Mr. Page asked for his resignation.

Google could have fired Mr. Rubin and paid him little to nothing on the way out. Instead, the company handed him a $90 million exit package, paid in installments of about $2 million a month for four years, said two people with knowledge of the terms. The last payment is scheduled for next month.
 

Rado_N

Yaaas Broncos!
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
110,905
Location
Manchester
They can't fire him if nothing is proven against him, the article says it was just an allegation. Much easier to pay him enough that he just leaves.
CA is an "at will" state, anybody can be fired for any or no reason at any time.
 

Varun

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Mar 16, 2011
Messages
46,772
Location
Mumbai
Fantastic stuff and massive kudos to the group who started this.
 

NotworkSte

Full Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
687
Location
Tampa, Fl
CA is an "at will" state, anybody can be fired for any or no reason at any time.
Executives that love the at will status often themselves are on employment agreements that give them protections regular employees don't have.
 

prateik

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
42,151
if an entry level employee reported sexual harassment by a superior google would have no problem firing the victim. its only the executives who get golden parachutes.
Probably because the entry level employee wont go to court as it making it public will only harm their future job opportunities and the payoff is nowhere near worth it.

A top executive stands to gain tens of millions if he/she can make it a case of wrongful dismissal.. They are more likely to challenge it..

Making it public helps no one. Paying them off and asking them to move on is the easier/less messy option.
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
33,113
Probably because the entry level employee wont go to court as it making it public will only harm their future job opportunities and the payoff is nowhere near worth it.

A top executive stands to gain tens of millions if he/she can make it a case of wrongful dismissal.. They are more likely to challenge it..

Making it public helps no one. Paying them off and asking them to move on is the easier/less messy option.
Well it’s been made public now and has made they option more messy with employees striking and Google just paying him off like that. If they had credible evidence then they should have felt confident.
 

Eboue

nasty little twerp with crazy bitter-man opinions
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
61,071
Location
I'm typing this with my Glock 19 two feet from me
Probably because the entry level employee wont go to court as it making it public will only harm their future job opportunities and the payoff is nowhere near worth it.

A top executive stands to gain tens of millions if he/she can make it a case of wrongful dismissal.. They are more likely to challenge it..

Making it public helps no one. Paying them off and asking them to move on is the easier/less messy option.
yes well done for proving that corporations are immoral and treat employees like shit while the rich executives never face any consequences
 

prateik

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
42,151
yes well done for proving that corporations are immoral and treat employees like shit while the rich executives never face any consequences
Lol. sure.

They are getting rid of the person accused of inappropriate behaviour.

The payoff is most likely to cover their own ass and not have their name involved in a messy legal battle. I doubt any company would give people millions of dollars if they didn't feel like they had to.

I'm not bringing my pitchfork out for that.
 

prateik

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
42,151
Well it’s been made public now and has made they option more messy with employees striking and Google just paying him off like that. If they had credible evidence then they should have felt confident.
Yeah. Hopefully going forward, companies would stop with this behaviour.. but its not just google/tech companies.. and its not just for sexual harassment.

People have been getting these payoffs for years after messing up. It has been the easiest path.

It would be nice if that changed.. and hopefully it will. It was easier to keep things like this under wraps 20 years ago... not so much anymore.
 

adexkola

Doesn't understand sportswashing.
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
48,028
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
If they say, "feck off and get out", there is nothing preventing him from going up the street to a competitor. The payout is to prevent litigation (which an executive can certainly do), and prevent trade secrets from getting leaked.

Someone in Google did the calculation that it's not worth considering the public reaction on this.
 

adexkola

Doesn't understand sportswashing.
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
48,028
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
The walkout is obviously great news. I don't see Google or other companies voluntarily ending forced arbitration. Arbitration panels lean towards the company in most cases, it would take a lot for them to relinquish that and let the courts decide. It would have to be forced by law. CA is very liberal so I can see their legislature passing arbitration legislation in the next few years that tips the balance towards workers.
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
33,113
If they say, "feck off and get out", there is nothing preventing him from going up the street to a competitor. The payout is to prevent litigation (which an executive can certainly do), and prevent trade secrets from getting leaked.

Someone in Google did the calculation that it's not worth considering the public reaction on this.
The only real competition in terms of software is Apple and if they find out would that he was fired due to sexual allegations then they wouldn’t touch him with a barge pole. Hardware wise the likes of Samsung are far ahead of Google without needing Rubin.

He did release his own phone though, which failed.
 

adexkola

Doesn't understand sportswashing.
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
48,028
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
The only real competition in terms of software is Apple and if they find out would that he was fired due to sexual allegations then they wouldn’t touch him with a barge pole. Hardware wise the likes of Samsung are far ahead of Google without needing Rubin.

He did release his own phone though, which failed.
The landscape of Silicon Valley is much more complicated than an Apple - Google - Samsung trifecta. If it was as simple as that then they would let him go without a payout. Google is a traded company... companies don't make payouts out of the goodness of their hearts without a business justification, over paying dividends to shareholders. And there's a strong case to be made that the payout, public opinion aside, made sense for Google's bottom line from a legal and technology standpoint.

Plus, if you're good enough, you'll get hired. Probably not as a direct employee, to prevent public angst. As a consultant? Most certainly. The legal settlement covers all of that.
 

Eboue

nasty little twerp with crazy bitter-man opinions
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
61,071
Location
I'm typing this with my Glock 19 two feet from me
Lol. sure.

They are getting rid of the person accused of inappropriate behaviour.

The payoff is most likely to cover their own ass and not have their name involved in a messy legal battle. I doubt any company would give people millions of dollars if they didn't feel like they had to.

I'm not bringing my pitchfork out for that.
there are plenty of examples of companies doing just that for executives.
 

prateik

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
42,151
The only real competition in terms of software is Apple and if they find out would that he was fired due to sexual allegations then they wouldn’t touch him with a barge pole. Hardware wise the likes of Samsung are far ahead of Google without needing Rubin.

He did release his own phone though, which failed.
You think that's all Rubin did? He was leading their Robotics division which had acquired Boston Dynamics before he left. Google sold off Boston Dynamics shortly after that as well.

Google spends billions on Google X. Wouldnt be surprised if Rubin knew things about that as well. You dont kick someone with that information out.. like it or not
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,348
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
The walkout is obviously great news. I don't see Google or other companies voluntarily ending forced arbitration. Arbitration panels lean towards the company in most cases, it would take a lot for them to relinquish that and let the courts decide. It would have to be forced by law. CA is very liberal so I can see their legislature passing arbitration legislation in the next few years that tips the balance towards workers.
That’s what I’m struggling with. What’s the alternative to arbitration? Every incident of allaged harrassment or discrimination gets dragged through the courts? That’s going to mean a lot of lawyers making a tonne of cash but I’m not seeing how this makes life any better for the employees?
 

adexkola

Doesn't understand sportswashing.
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
48,028
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
That’s what I’m struggling with. What’s the alternative to arbitration? Every incident of allaged harrassment or discrimination gets dragged through the courts? That’s going to mean a lot of lawyers making a tonne of cash but I’m not seeing how this makes life any better for the employees?
Maybe the mere threat of legal action will make the company lean more towards an employee, to avoid the attention a legal case brings?

Just guessing here.
 

berbatrick

Renaissance Man
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
21,539
That’s what I’m struggling with. What’s the alternative to arbitration? Every incident of allaged harrassment or discrimination gets dragged through the courts? That’s going to mean a lot of lawyers making a tonne of cash but I’m not seeing how this makes life any better for the employees?
A least in the US since this year, the company can force arbitration within the employment contract itself. IE the employee cannot take them to court for any case. I'm guesssing they want that clause removed.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/womens-ri...urt-favors-forced-arbitration-expense-workers
 

unchanged_lineup

Tarheel Tech Wizard
Joined
Aug 9, 2014
Messages
16,757
Location
Leaving A Breakfast On All Of Your Doorsteps
Supports
Janet jazz jazz jam

adexkola

Doesn't understand sportswashing.
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
48,028
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
A least in the US since this year, the company can force arbitration within the employment contract itself. IE the employee cannot take them to court for any case. I'm guesssing they want that clause removed.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/womens-ri...urt-favors-forced-arbitration-expense-workers
At some point, probably when the Democrats hold majorities in both houses, legislation needs to be passed that undercuts rulings like this. This is not only applicable to this case; the furore over Roe would be greatly diminished if Congress did it's job and banged out sensible legislation that eliminates the need for abortion rights to live or die on the decision of 9 judges.
 

Alock1

Wears XXXL shirts and can't type ellipses
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
16,081
I know a few people who work in the Dublin office and it sounds like the best place to work ever so I guess if they've nothing else to worry about, they may as well.
Not sure about the first point. Facilities are great but they're there with the intention of encourage presenteeism.

But yes, I agree, whilst there's clearly some issues with individual victims, particular when senior stakeholders are involved but for something like a group walkout, they're comfortable in feeling protected and by most managers backed. I don't think that undercuts what they're doing though, it's still a move to be encouraged.
 

Blatzo

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
1,713
The article says that Google felt the accusation was "credible" - which is typically used as a synonym for plausible. As in "it could have happened."

It also says Rubin denies the accusation and that he was involved in an extramarital affair with the woman.

Based on the facts that are available from the articles in this thread I'm finding it hard to see a fairer conclusion than the one that Google came to.

They've basically offered a severance package to an employee that they felt they could no longer employ. She says she was sexually harassed. He says she wasn't. They say it could have happened but they're not certain either way and found a solution which served everybody's interest.

The bolded bit in the OP says they're walking out over the companies treatment of women, but they're not. They're walking out over the treatment of a man who has been accused of sexual harassment.

As much as I want to live in a society where nobody is sexually harassed. I'd also like to live in one where an accusation isn't all that's required to see somebody lose their job, income, status and reputation.
 

Silva

Full Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
30,756
Location
Smoke crack like Isaac Asimov
Fisher quotes Google’s first executive chef, Charlie Ayers, and Heather Cairns, the company’s first HR manager:

Charlie Ayers: Sergey’s the Google playboy. He was known for getting his fingers caught in the cookie jar with employees that worked for the company in the masseuse room. He got around.

Heather Cairns: And we didn’t have locks, so you can’t help it if you walk in on people if there’s no lock. Remember, we’re a bunch of twentysomethings except for me—ancient at 35, so there’s some hormones and they’re raging.

Charlie Ayers: H.R. told me that Sergey’s response to it was, “Why not? They’re my employees.” But you don’t have employees for fecking! That’s not what the job is.

Heather Cairns: Oh my God: This is a sexual harassment claim waiting to happen! That was my concern.
https://qz.com/work/1326942/sergey-...his-female-employees-according-to-a-new-book/
 

11101

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
21,202
CA is an "at will" state, anybody can be fired for any or no reason at any time.
He wasn't just an anybody though. He founded Android which was bought out by Google. He will not have been on a regular employment contract.

Besides, it's hardly right that someone could just be booted from a lucrative job without comeback because someone made an accusation against them.
 

Silva

Full Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
30,756
Location
Smoke crack like Isaac Asimov
Besides, it's hardly right that someone could just be booted from a lucrative job without comeback because someone made an accusation against them.
the accusation was considered credible (i.e true) by googles own corrupt arbitration system and they chose to buy him out because their executive branch does as they will with impunity
 

berbatrick

Renaissance Man
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
21,539
The article says that Google felt the accusation was "credible" - which is typically used as a synonym for plausible. As in "it could have happened."

It also says Rubin denies the accusation and that he was involved in an extramarital affair with the woman.

Based on the facts that are available from the articles in this thread I'm finding it hard to see a fairer conclusion than the one that Google came to.

They've basically offered a severance package to an employee that they felt they could no longer employ. She says she was sexually harassed. He says she wasn't. They say it could have happened but they're not certain either way and found a solution which served everybody's interest.

The bolded bit in the OP says they're walking out over the companies treatment of women, but they're not. They're walking out over the treatment of a man who has been accused of sexual harassment.

As much as I want to live in a society where nobody is sexually harassed. I'd also like to live in one where an accusation isn't all that's required to see somebody lose their job, income, status and reputation.
Mr. Rubin, 55, who met his wife at Google, also dated other women at the company while married, said four people who worked with him. In 2011, he had a consensual relationship with a woman on the Android team who did not report to him, they said. They said Google’s human resources department was not informed, despite rules requiring disclosure when managers date someone who directly or indirectly reports to them.

In a civil suit filed this month by Mr. Rubin’s ex-wife, Rie Rubin, she claimed he had multiple “ownership relationships” with other women during their marriage, paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to them. The couple were divorced in August.


The suit included a screenshot of an August 2015 email Mr. Rubin sent to one woman. “You will be happy being taken care of,” he wrote. “Being owned is kinda like you are my property, and I can loan you to other people.”
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
10,047
Location
Blitztown
Person that’s really good at job gets paid to leave job.

It’s not like the pay off was for being really good at harassment. He crafted their mobile OS ffs.

You work for Google. Applaud your efforts for trying to make a point. But the payout was justified.

He left (probably) because his personal conduct was bad. He still generated billions of dollars for them. He deserves a pay out by the standards of the whole companies structure.

Just be happy that he’s gone.

Idiots.