7 ms·

Wouldn't there be a pretty direct correlation between an attempted punishment and the pregnancy announcement? Like if there were no previous problems, isn't thi

Wouldn't there be a pretty direct correlation between an attempted punishment and the pregnancy announcement? Like if there were no previous problems, isn't this pretty clear discrimination?

potatolicious 11y ago
This is why the PIP exists - it's "documentation" and "proof" the the employee is an underperformer. PIPs provide legal cover for firings that would otherwise not pass cursory examination. [edit] The PIP may have started out as a good faith effort to improve underperformers, but at this point I see them used more frequently as political and legal tools than honest attempts at "salvaging" poor employees.
- sharkweek 11y ago
  Totally, but couldn't you point back to telling your boss that you're pregnant and be like "I literally told you a few weeks ago that I'm pregnant and now you're putting me on a PIP, this is not a coincidence"
  - potatolicious 11y ago
    Yeah, they're not going to have a leg to stand on if this ever made it to a lawsuit - a PIP on someone after they announced their pregnancy is pretty lulzy. But it's an intimidation tactic like any other - your options here are either leave quietly (like the author of the original post), or be fired unceremoniously as a documented poor-performer and have that hanging over your career, and maybe sue the company for wrongful termination. 99% of the time, even when the situation is patently unfair and insanely unjust, people will choose Option A. Even if you choose Option B and sue the employer, Amazon has a warchest the size of the moon and lawyers on staff best measured in boatloads - so more likely than not you'd be forced to settle for a modest sum and still have the firing on record, and no admission of fault on Amazon's part.
    - MCRed 11y ago
      Consider this, though, Amazon has a large need to fill vacancies and the media (even in Seattle) is happy to run stories about worker mistreatment. I never worry about pointing out the evils of Amazon (despite them making me sign a contract meant to intimidate me into shutting up) because I know if they take me to court I'll have the opportunity to have my say publicly. And that's the last thing they want. At Amazon, if you get your PIP and you refuse to sign it, I think they will fire you, and then you will be offered a check in order to sign an agreement not to sue them. So, if you get the PIP it may be more profitable to just refuse to sign it and start looking for another job (with a bigger severance) than waste a couple months at Amazon while looking for another job. BTW- the reason I got my PIP was that I had a job at AWS and an offer in hand and went to try and transfer.
    - saranagati 11y ago
      valid points but to be fair this thread is referring to google not amazon.
    - enraged_camel 11y ago
      >>or be fired unceremoniously as a documented poor-performer and have that hanging over your career How would something like a PIP affect one's career? Companies don't share that information, or they expose themselves to serious litigation risk. That's why most places have a policy to only verify an ex-employee's dates of employment and job title if someone calls to ask.
- fweespeech 11y ago
  Yes, but starting the PIP after there is a documented pregnancy announcement to management isn't going to shield them from liability I suspect.
  - wpietri 11y ago
    My first lawyer taught me a very valuable lesson: the important question isn't whether you'll win the suit eventually, it's whether you can afford to go the distance. Doing the PIP after doesn't increase the distance as much as doing it before, but it definitely makes it harder to sue than if they just fired you the day after a positive performance review.
    - rapind 11y ago
      Is it fantasy that the payday would be significant enough that a decent lawyer would take the case on commission? Seems to me that a lawyer who had the resources to go the distance could totally make this an easy and profitable win for a client who's getting on with her life in the meantime. Amazon's lawyers are probably expensive right? They also have to risk setting precedents and future cases not being so easily intimidated. Seems like they would have a lot to lose letting this go to court, even if they intend to drag it out.
      - exelius 11y ago
        > Amazon's lawyers are probably expensive right? They also have to risk setting precedents and future cases not being so easily intimidated. Seems like they would have a lot to lose letting this go to court, even if they intend to drag it out. But that's the thing: they don't need to let it go to court, they just have to drag out the pre-trial proceedings for a few years until you've either moved on with your life or forgotten enough of the details. Most cases settle out of court, but before that happens there is due process that a good HR defense attorney can absolutely stretch out for years. As far as their lawyers, it costs a big company like Amazon very little, since the lawyers are likely on salary. They would probably hire an outside attorney to represent them in person at a trial, but since the vast majority (>95%) of cases settle before they make it that far, their internal HR lawyers would probably handle most of the grunt work of filing paperwork until someone actually needs to show up at the court house. Also it's probably not as much money as you think; unless it can be proven that the company's actions were malicious and intentional against a protected class, you probably won't see much more than 6 months salary. The problem is in gathering the evidence to prove this and keeping track of it over the course of a few years.
- ddispaltro 11y ago
  That's exactly what the pip has turned into, it's justification and legal air cover for a decision you've already made.
- MCRed 11y ago
  True, I wonder how many other women at Google have had this happen to them-- pregnant then suddenly PIP. If there's a pattern there, then a clear discrimination case could still be made, I think.
- verelo 11y ago
  Can someone please define "PIP"? I honestly have no idea what it means.
  - slantedview 11y ago
    Performance improvement plan. It's the first step in letting an employee know - supposedly - that their performance is lacking and needs to be improved else they be terminated. But as mentioned, PIPs can be misused for other means.
    - verelo 11y ago
      Thanks!
    - overgryphon 11y ago
      It's not the first step to letting an employee know there performance is at risk. Or it isn't supposed to be.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- dennisgorelik 11y ago
  Judging by these 6+ years old comments [1], PIP was a path to getting fired for a while. --- [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=473232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=473232
s73v3r 11y ago
Unless you have a recording of your manager coming out and saying, "I'm putting you on the PIP because you got pregnant," you can't do anything, because there's no proof that's why it happened. Which is fucking bullshit, because everyone with a modicum of logical thinking could see that's exactly why it's happening. But instead of them having to prove that the PIP was justified, you get people having to prove that they're not being fucked over by a bully.
rdtsc 11y ago
You'd need to prove it though. The official position of Google is probably "it is a performance / restructuring thing and pregnancy is purely accidental coincidence". (Wink-wink). Of course the winks only happen in person they are not written down. So now someone who has a baby on the way has to pay for a lawyer and fight an uphill and expensive case.
- fludlight 11y ago
  Also, suing your previous employer ends your career. Prospective employers will see you as a troublemaker and no one will hire you after that, even in a different field.
  - noomerikal 11y ago
    I don't think this is the case at all. In 17 years, I have never seen the company let it get to trial. Most recent example is Ellen Pao -> CEO Reddit.
    - fludlight 11y ago
      It doesn't have to make it to trial, it just has to be searchable. A civil complaint is enough.
    - slantedview 11y ago
      But we're not talking about the Ellen Pao's of the world, we're talking about average workers. I've seen firsthand that some employers won't want to touch someone who sued a former employer - for any reason.
x0x0 11y ago
My partner was discriminated against in a similar way. An employment lawyer told her several things: (1) it's difficult to prove, and often juries really want bright line discrimination (eg an email saying fire that bitch for getting pregnant); a pattern of discrimination without a smoking gun is a harder sell to a jury (2) be ready to never work in that industry again, and maybe to never work again (3) do you really want this to be what you do with the next 2-3 years of your life She declined to pursue it. Or as the saying goes, "in its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." One law for the rich, another for the rest of us.

Wouldn't there be a pretty direct correlation between an attempted punishment and the pregnancy announcement? Like if there were no previous problems, isn't this pretty clear discrimination?

potatolicious 11y ago

This is why the PIP exists - it's "documentation" and "proof" the the employee is an underperformer. PIPs provide legal cover for firings that would otherwise not pass cursory examination. [edit] The PIP may have started out as a good faith effort to improve underperformers, but at this point I see them used more frequently as political and legal tools than honest attempts at "salvaging" poor employees.

sharkweek 11y ago
Totally, but couldn't you point back to telling your boss that you're pregnant and be like "I literally told you a few weeks ago that I'm pregnant and now you're putting me on a PIP, this is not a coincidence"
- potatolicious 11y ago
  Yeah, they're not going to have a leg to stand on if this ever made it to a lawsuit - a PIP on someone after they announced their pregnancy is pretty lulzy. But it's an intimidation tactic like any other - your options here are either leave quietly (like the author of the original post), or be fired unceremoniously as a documented poor-performer and have that hanging over your career, and maybe sue the company for wrongful termination. 99% of the time, even when the situation is patently unfair and insanely unjust, people will choose Option A. Even if you choose Option B and sue the employer, Amazon has a warchest the size of the moon and lawyers on staff best measured in boatloads - so more likely than not you'd be forced to settle for a modest sum and still have the firing on record, and no admission of fault on Amazon's part.
  - MCRed 11y ago
    Consider this, though, Amazon has a large need to fill vacancies and the media (even in Seattle) is happy to run stories about worker mistreatment. I never worry about pointing out the evils of Amazon (despite them making me sign a contract meant to intimidate me into shutting up) because I know if they take me to court I'll have the opportunity to have my say publicly. And that's the last thing they want. At Amazon, if you get your PIP and you refuse to sign it, I think they will fire you, and then you will be offered a check in order to sign an agreement not to sue them. So, if you get the PIP it may be more profitable to just refuse to sign it and start looking for another job (with a bigger severance) than waste a couple months at Amazon while looking for another job. BTW- the reason I got my PIP was that I had a job at AWS and an offer in hand and went to try and transfer.
  - saranagati 11y ago
    valid points but to be fair this thread is referring to google not amazon.
  - enraged_camel 11y ago
    >>or be fired unceremoniously as a documented poor-performer and have that hanging over your career How would something like a PIP affect one's career? Companies don't share that information, or they expose themselves to serious litigation risk. That's why most places have a policy to only verify an ex-employee's dates of employment and job title if someone calls to ask.
fweespeech 11y ago
Yes, but starting the PIP after there is a documented pregnancy announcement to management isn't going to shield them from liability I suspect.
- wpietri 11y ago
  My first lawyer taught me a very valuable lesson: the important question isn't whether you'll win the suit eventually, it's whether you can afford to go the distance. Doing the PIP after doesn't increase the distance as much as doing it before, but it definitely makes it harder to sue than if they just fired you the day after a positive performance review.
  - rapind 11y ago
    Is it fantasy that the payday would be significant enough that a decent lawyer would take the case on commission? Seems to me that a lawyer who had the resources to go the distance could totally make this an easy and profitable win for a client who's getting on with her life in the meantime. Amazon's lawyers are probably expensive right? They also have to risk setting precedents and future cases not being so easily intimidated. Seems like they would have a lot to lose letting this go to court, even if they intend to drag it out.
    - exelius 11y ago
      > Amazon's lawyers are probably expensive right? They also have to risk setting precedents and future cases not being so easily intimidated. Seems like they would have a lot to lose letting this go to court, even if they intend to drag it out. But that's the thing: they don't need to let it go to court, they just have to drag out the pre-trial proceedings for a few years until you've either moved on with your life or forgotten enough of the details. Most cases settle out of court, but before that happens there is due process that a good HR defense attorney can absolutely stretch out for years. As far as their lawyers, it costs a big company like Amazon very little, since the lawyers are likely on salary. They would probably hire an outside attorney to represent them in person at a trial, but since the vast majority (>95%) of cases settle before they make it that far, their internal HR lawyers would probably handle most of the grunt work of filing paperwork until someone actually needs to show up at the court house. Also it's probably not as much money as you think; unless it can be proven that the company's actions were malicious and intentional against a protected class, you probably won't see much more than 6 months salary. The problem is in gathering the evidence to prove this and keeping track of it over the course of a few years.
ddispaltro 11y ago
That's exactly what the pip has turned into, it's justification and legal air cover for a decision you've already made.
MCRed 11y ago
True, I wonder how many other women at Google have had this happen to them-- pregnant then suddenly PIP. If there's a pattern there, then a clear discrimination case could still be made, I think.
verelo 11y ago
Can someone please define "PIP"? I honestly have no idea what it means.
- slantedview 11y ago
  Performance improvement plan. It's the first step in letting an employee know - supposedly - that their performance is lacking and needs to be improved else they be terminated. But as mentioned, PIPs can be misused for other means.
  - verelo 11y ago
    Thanks!
  - overgryphon 11y ago
    It's not the first step to letting an employee know there performance is at risk. Or it isn't supposed to be.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
dennisgorelik 11y ago
Judging by these 6+ years old comments [1], PIP was a path to getting fired for a while. --- [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=473232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=473232

s73v3r 11y ago

Unless you have a recording of your manager coming out and saying, "I'm putting you on the PIP because you got pregnant," you can't do anything, because there's no proof that's why it happened. Which is fucking bullshit, because everyone with a modicum of logical thinking could see that's exactly why it's happening. But instead of them having to prove that the PIP was justified, you get people having to prove that they're not being fucked over by a bully.

rdtsc 11y ago

You'd need to prove it though. The official position of Google is probably "it is a performance / restructuring thing and pregnancy is purely accidental coincidence". (Wink-wink). Of course the winks only happen in person they are not written down. So now someone who has a baby on the way has to pay for a lawyer and fight an uphill and expensive case.

fludlight 11y ago
Also, suing your previous employer ends your career. Prospective employers will see you as a troublemaker and no one will hire you after that, even in a different field.
- noomerikal 11y ago
  I don't think this is the case at all. In 17 years, I have never seen the company let it get to trial. Most recent example is Ellen Pao -> CEO Reddit.
  - fludlight 11y ago
    It doesn't have to make it to trial, it just has to be searchable. A civil complaint is enough.
  - slantedview 11y ago
    But we're not talking about the Ellen Pao's of the world, we're talking about average workers. I've seen firsthand that some employers won't want to touch someone who sued a former employer - for any reason.

x0x0 11y ago

My partner was discriminated against in a similar way. An employment lawyer told her several things: (1) it's difficult to prove, and often juries really want bright line discrimination (eg an email saying fire that bitch for getting pregnant); a pattern of discrimination without a smoking gun is a harder sell to a jury (2) be ready to never work in that industry again, and maybe to never work again (3) do you really want this to be what you do with the next 2-3 years of your life She declined to pursue it. Or as the saying goes, "in its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." One law for the rich, another for the rest of us.