Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It's not just the employer. James' Damore's memo silenced a lot of the more conservative thinkers, especially as he didn't even want that memo to be public, just a research on a mailing list. Harassment from the political left was very strong at Google, that it was just a matter of time until it bit back.

As for me as a white man although I was just doing my job silently, I didn't feel appreciated and tried to isolate myself from meetings / politics and just focus on work (and was happy to leave 1 year after that memo). The fun old times when we could just focus on making the user happy and talk about doing cool stuff was over.




Damore posted his stupid screed all over the place for months. He posted it to mailing lists, he printed it out and waved it around at conferences.


Maybe you are right, I was working in Switzerland, not in US.

What I remember clearly though is that Google's training contained material about how I am allowed to socialize with coworkers outside work, which may be allowed in the US, but it was clearly against the Swiss constitution (my job security was more important to me than speaking up about this though)


What exactly did this training say? I'm just a little suspicious that Google was saying you couldn't socialize with friends outside the office, since that's unenforceable, not in their interests, and also deeply stupid.


I didn't write that that we couldn't, it was about how we could.

For example we shouldn't tell a coworker that he/she's pretty, shouldn't get drunk together, and a lot of behaviour that is considered flirting and getting to know eachother in Switzerland.

In US behaviour outside Google is handled by the company as well, but in Switzerland there are very strict privacy laws and culture that forbid companies to control any part of the life of people outside work. The right to privacy is part of the Swiss constitution, and it's taken there very seriously (to the point where generally the tax authorities don't have the right to look at your bank accounts, unlike in US for example).

Edit: I can't reply, so I extend this comment

,,shouldn't'' is not banning.

And also what you write that Google may have a problem if harassment happens is true, but I still think you think in US law terms: privacy in Switzerland is like voting right in US: it's like telling that ,,you are not advised to vote for Trump as a president''. Or telling you that ,,you are hired, but you should probably go back to Mexico''.

warkdarrior: Again, yes, in US that training is legal and socially acceptable. But the training was in violation of the Swiss constitution...I'm not sure why people in US don't understand that the laws are different in different countries (people from other countries understand it generally). Harassment is a trendy topic right now, but it doesn't trump privacy and the right for not controlling any part of a person's life outside work, even if that's with coworkers, and even if it may lead to a legal problem for Google. In Switzerland people are grownups, they don't need babysitting.

I have to add one more thing: Andy Ruby belongs to prison, everybody knows it, and giving us more trainings won't help the main issue, that the top management was/is raping women or coercing them to have sex to keep their jobs.


Typically that type of employee training in US is meant to limit sexual harassment, where a person thinks they are flirting and the co-worker on the receiving end is offended. HR would step in at that point and take action against the harasser, so i see that kind of training about being careful in socializing as a way to warn people about the consequences of their actions.


Is it sexual harassment because it's in the workplace or it's because the receiving end didn't like it/the flirting person or because flirting IS a sexual harassment?


Castration leads to decreased sexual harassment too. But we don't allow companies to castrate their employees.


TBH I am again skeptical that there was a training that said this. I could buy if there were a training that explained that such behaviors could be construed as harassment under certain circumstances (e.g. if you had previously made advances and been turned down). I could buy if there were a training that told you you should think twice before doing these sorts of things. That's just sensible advice, since if someone does take your behavior as harassment and took the complaint to HR, then you're in a bad situation, at best. A training that banned you from doing those things? I doubt.


Corps have a habit of buying in US services tailored for a US audience and then just blithely pushing that crap out to all their international employees with scant attention about outcomes, its just "mandatory".

As such you have to watch some real thoughtless, poorly put together, bottom of the barrel crap so legal can tick a box that diminishes their responsibility. Given the motivations at play here I wouldn't be surprised if they ballsed it up like this.


I work at Google in California. Unless you have completely different trainings, I don't think your characterization is accurate. For one it doesn't say at all that you should not get drunk together. In fact there are many company events where alcohol is served and some teams keep a stash of liquor in the office.


I work a corp that dishes out mandatory training and I feel like you have the wrong end of the stick. Its not necessarily well put together by smart people, rather its cheaply produced, so this outcome would not be surprising.


Curious as well. And skeptical.

So far every example I ever saw of a conservative complaining about their freedoms and speech being limited, they either don't disclose the full story, or when they do, I never end up agreeing that any valid right of theirs was violated or infringed. Instead it's always just crying about having to be even the most basic level of civilized.

And I'm very much in the Bill Maher camp when it comes to liberal counter-productive hyper righteousness and intolerance. And I'm a leftie who disagrees with the left on guns. Try being that guy at parties.

Yet somehow I don't feel beaten into submission and into hiding my opinions for survival, even the unpopular ones. There must be some mysterious other ingredient involved with these poor hobbled heros. What could it possibly be?


Haha, what are you talking about? Are you saying Swiss employees are legally not allowed to socialise with work colleagues? Do you honestly think this happens in practice?


I was confused by GP until I reread it and realised that the operative word is how.

I don't know anything about Swiss law or Google internal policy but I think what he's saying is that it's illegal in Switzerland to dictate how your employees socialise with each other outside of work (and perhaps to dictate anything else about how employees behave in their private lives?), not that it's illegal for employees to socialise at all.


No, the opposite. Google aren't allowed to tell you how you can socialize with your colleagues outside of work




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: