It's pretty much standard for most companies. The employee either stupidly or knowingly brought bad publicity to the company, and he put the comapny in harm's way while they are fighting discrimination cases from the Dept of Labor. As far as explaining the comments, it's not curious at all - the post was self-explajnatory about the stereotypes. The employee literally listed them in there and admitted they were stereotypes. It's almost as though you didn't read his post.
It's hard to know the specifics issues he has with the training, since I don't think either of us are Google employees and know (for example) what he means when he refers to v2.3 as "likely useful". On stereotypes, he says he's not advocating for their use but opposes how they are discussed in the training. Again, without knowing what specifically he is taking exception to it's hard for me to pass judgment on that.
Zerohedge is pretty terrible, as usual. Left out pieces on purpose. Better source: https://www.recode.net/2017/8/7/161...emo-on-women-has-violated-its-code-of-conduct Here is the full statement from Google CEO with reason for firing in bold red. Many people are going to also ignore his other points. ---------------------- From: Sundar Subject: Our words matter This has been a very difficult few days. I wanted to provide an update on the memo that was circulated over this past week. First, let me say that we strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it. However, portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace. Our job is to build great products for users that make a difference in their lives. To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK. It is contrary to our basic values and our Code of Conduct, which expects “each Googler to do their utmost to create a workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination.” The memo has clearly impacted our co-workers, some of whom are hurting and feel judged based on their gender. Our co-workers shouldn’t have to worry that each time they open their mouths to speak in a meeting, they have to prove that they are not like the memo states, being “agreeable” rather than “assertive,” showing a “lower stress tolerance,” or being “neurotic.” At the same time, there are co-workers who are questioning whether they can safely express their views in the workplace (especially those with a minority viewpoint). They too feel under threat, and that is also not OK. People must feel free to express dissent. So to be clear again, many points raised in the memo — such as the portions criticizing Google’s trainings, questioning the role of ideology in the workplace, and debating whether programs for women and underserved groups are sufficiently open to all — are important topics. The author had a right to express their views on those topics — we encourage an environment in which people can do this and it remains our policy to not take action against anyone for prompting these discussions. The past few days have been very difficult for many at the company, and we need to find a way to debate issues on which we might disagree — while doing so in line with our Code of Conduct. I’d encourage each of you to make an effort over the coming days to reach out to those who might have different perspectives from your own. I will be doing the same. I have been on work related travel in Africa and Europe the past couple of weeks and had just started my family vacation here this week. I have decided to return tomorrow as clearly there’s a lot more to discuss as a group — including how we create a more inclusive environment for all. So please join me, along with members of the leadership team at a town hall on Thursday. Check your calendar soon for details. — Sundar
I think its a fair and measured response. I don't believe Google has officially verified whether the employee was fired.
Google said no comment- which is standard practice for any company (of any smart and value). You don't want to prevent someone (even publicly known) from being hire somewhere else. But I believe there are report that the employee has confirmed the firing. I also think so. It's not a good spot to be in and you do what you can. I side with the "left" here for these simple reasons: - unsubstantiated claim of biological differences between genders - not understanding what the "role" of SW/HW developer, managers, and other function of a tech company, etc... As an example, today tech world require great collaboration at almost every levels. Just based on that and on the same unsubstantial biological basis claims, I can said women are MORE likely to be better then men. What it comes down to is politicizing and stereotyping - which doesn't belong in the work place. That doesn't mean there can't be an honest debate on the other valid points.
Zerohedge is fine and linked to the response. That Google response seems wrong. Where did he claim anyone was 'biologically unsuited' for a job? Like I said before, an inability by Google to point to any quotes is very telling. Both your statement and the one by durvasa don't ever say which statement violated their code of conduct. Since Google won't, does anyone here want to tell me what quote from the memo suggest women are biologically unsuited for a certain job at Google?
Seems like you're the one who's outraged. An angry white guy talking down women and minorities is a pretty regular event. Just read this forum a bit.
I guess pointing out that some stereotypes are based in facts, contrary to what I suppose their mandatory training stated, can create an discriminatory/biased environment? I don't know. Personally, I think it's a weak reason to fire him. More likely, it was done to pacify other employees who took offense, but I guess you can't call that the official reason.
Yes, I was frustrated reading the way in which his memo was presented in non-conservative media outlets online (I didn't read what conservatives had to say about it). The headlines were particularly bad and misleading. Pretty much refused to honestly take on his objections and focused almost exclusively on shaming and presenting it as an anti-diversity manifesto. I think the title of this thread is accurate.
Leaving out important pieces that goes against their agenda isn't fine. It's agenda driven. This is what he claim - men and women are biological different. Then proceed to stereotype based on that claim. It's like me claiming men are inferior musician because of biological differences, but don't explain why. Just biological differences. In other word, I have a concept or belief and made my own connection based on biological differences that haven't been substantiated as reason for men being inferior musician . I'm stereotyping and using unsubstantiated biological excuses for it. It's not ok in a workplace.
I didn't ask for your bullshit summary Tony. I asked for his statement that women are unsuitedd for a certain job at Google. That is the stated reason for him being fired. As for what you wrote. 'He claimed men and women arer biologically different'. What a bold radical claim.......
The guy was a PhD of Biology in Harvard. I think it is safe to say he understands biology better than you and me. LOL.
Yes, what a bold statement. If he didn't make the unsubstantiated connection, no one would care. Tell you what. Why don't you google and show that there are science to back up his claims. Show me the light of my ignorance.
