12 ms·

This is very much like a sign that Uber again takes an old path of silencing people and problems instead of fixing toxic culture. Makes me think that they also

by urahara 10y ago

This is very much like a sign that Uber again takes an old path of silencing people and problems instead of fixing toxic culture. Makes me think that they also prepare to blackmail Fowler.

cbanek 10y ago
Seems like they have probably already started: https://twitter.com/susanthesquark/status/835193441814392833 https://twitter.com/susanthesquark/status/835193441814392833
- BinaryIdiot 10y ago
  This seems to be Uber's modus operandi every single time they're in trouble and it almost always seems to backfire on them, PR wise. I'm curious though, what tipped her off? While I've worked at tech start-ups before and can believe all the behavior she outlined (because I've seen similar things myself, it's very believable) it still bothers me to continue to take someone's word at face value. I mean I do, I would trust what she says over Uber any day, but I wish more of this type of information was verifiable.
  - toyg 10y ago
    Likely an ex-colleague she kept in touch with, who tipped her that s/he had been tapped. I know I would react that way, if anyone started asking pointed questions about a friend.
  - watwut 10y ago
    I find it fascinating that on one hand many people call what she described as standard and on the other people still call SV meritocracy. Even if you ignore sexism, the environment seemed to favor political maneuvring over skill and achievement.
    - beaconstudios 10y ago
      I don't think a whole region can really be called a meritocracy - that strikes me as a pervasive myth. It would seem that meritocracy is something that a lot of SV companies strive for, but you'll always get companies that operate like Uber where meritocracy takes a back seat to politics and posturing.
      - jordigh 10y ago
        While in principle being judged by nothing by your actions is a great, well, principle, in practice "meritocracy" ends up favouring people who were already socially advantaged in some way or another (e.g. male) to elicit the actions that the meritocratic judge is looking for. The idea sounds nice, but it ends up just reinforcing cronyism. If you belong to the right in-group, usually stratified along some social injustice, you'll display the merits that in-group wants.
        beaconstudios 10y ago
        the point of a meritocracy is to produce the best possible work and reward good performance, not to right real or perceived injustices. Statistically speaking, if the majority of developers are male then a majority of high-performing developers will also be male. Hiring lower-performing females to attempt to achieve balance does not fix the original issue, and it serves to harm the hiring company by choosing people based on social group rather than skill. Solving underrepresentation issues is, in my opinion, more about changing the perception of the industry for those poorly represented groups and performing outreach at younger ages, rather than having companies hire disproportionately more women or people of colour so that their employees look more diverse. That doesn't really solve anything.
        jordigh 10y ago
        Okay, so when I object and say "cronyism" you hear "let's hire idiots just because they're women". It doesn't have to be either of these. A simple thing you can do is publicly state, "we encourage women and other minorities to apply". And that's all. You encourage them. You don't have to give them any preferential treatment to pad your numbers (and I don't think anyone ever really does that, but a lot of people seem to be afraid that it happens). You just have to explicitly direct your invitation to them. That's enough to increase your hiring pool and give your company culture a nudge in the right direction. If you object to the alleged benefits of having a diverse staff, I can't imagine you would object to attracting more people to apply who otherwise wouldn't. A further point I want to emphasise: what is merit? Who decides what is merit? If you think being nice to others has no merit (or is not "good performance"), then you may end up hiring toxic employees like Fowler's sexual harasser and then keep him around because of your merit metric. This will end up costing you good employees like Fowler.
  - uberthrowaway1 10y ago
    Using a throwaway for obvious reasons. >This seems to be Uber's modus operandi every single time they're in trouble and it almost always seems to backfire on them, PR wise. From attending all hands meetings I get the sense TK has a victim mentality and sees himself doing no wrong or Uber doing no wrong. Since we're clearly not wrong, it has to be the critic, right? /S To be fair, we do get some BS scandals related to surge (they turned off surge for natural disasters! They're profiting off us! They left it on, they're profiting off our misery!) but almost all of our scandals are self inflicted. >I'm curious though, what tipped her off? I'd wager an employee. Employees are very angry now at leadership, and in our last few all hands / CTO speaking to everyone (something they put together just for this week I think) people questioned publicly what's been questioned in the shadows for a while. For instance, Uber has a list of stupid "cultural values" that include values like "always be hustling" (yes, it's a direct quote) and I've been in private conversations with people who find these values obnoxious and poorly written. Never raised to management though. But this all hands people threw these bullshit values at TK and Thuan and pointed out how bad they are, including this specific "always be hustling" value. The questioner even referenced Zootopia ("It's called a hustle, sweetheart") to skewer it. Also it was pointed out how our perf review process doesn't reward collaboration between teams at all (hence the politicking). Felt almost like a press conference with ace reporters fighting against an unprepared, incompetent politician. Our CTO even cried, which was a little dramatic for me. Happy to see I'm not the only angry employee.
    - alphonsegaston 10y ago
      Thanks for the insights. Question about the inside view - do people really buy Kalanick's fake apologies/victim act at this point? We've gone through this ruse so many times, from the outside it just seems like a laughable caricature of malignant narcissism. From your comments about the CTO, I'm guessing he surrounds himself with "empathizable cover" after the classic abusive pattern (if you come after me, think about the damage it will do to the nice people around me).
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
  - tn13 10y ago
    True. In most such cases there is always an another side that we totally forget when looking at the victim's story. I would give Uber a fair 50% chance unless there is strong evidence on the table.
- dllthomas 10y ago
  She says in her next tweet that she doesn't know who it is or what their aims are. I doubt Uber is attempting to smear her. I don't think the people involved are that evil, but I'm pretty confident they aren't that stupid.
  - alphonsegaston 10y ago
    They previously (and probably illegally) hired a private intelligence firm to dig up dirt on their opponents in a court battle: http://www.theverge.com/2016/7/10/12127638/uber-ergo-investigation-lawsuit-fraud-travis-kalanick http://www.theverge.com/2016/7/10/12127638/uber-ergo-investi... They did the same to intimidate journalists: http://fortune.com/2014/11/18/uber-rides-into-new-pr-storm-over-digging-dirt-on-hostile-press/ http://fortune.com/2014/11/18/uber-rides-into-new-pr-storm-o...
    - dllthomas 10y ago
      To be clear, in this case I think it's quite unlikely, specifically, that Uber is looking for information with an intent to discredit, disparage, or defame Susan Fowler. > They previously (and probably illegally) hired a private intelligence firm to dig up dirt on their opponents in a court battle What was done there seems obviously inappropriate. It's unclear to what degree the intent was (I certainly understand wanting context). The situation was obviously very different. > They did the same to intimidate journalists Maybe. On the other hand: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-campbell/what-was-said-at-the-uber_b_6198250.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-campbell/what-was-said-... And even in the Ben Smith's account they didn't actually do it.
      - alphonsegaston 10y ago
        Why is it unlikely, given that they've done this exact thing in the past? You're entitled to think whatever you want, but you can't in good faith argue that this isn't their pattern of behavior. You're right that the circumstances are different, but the only constant is Uber underhandedly going after anyone who criticizes them. And an editorial in HuffPo from someone who pals around with the person engaging in the abusive behaviour is a pretty weak defense. Especially since they did a similar thing before: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/19/uber-investigates-top-executive-after-journalists-privacy-was-breached https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/19/uber-inve...
dominotw 10y ago
Huffington said this time all problems will be fixed. I trust her, can we give them some time before saying 'takes an old path '.
- mcguire 10y ago
  It's fun to listen to what people say, but you really need to watch what they do.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by urahara 10y ago

This is very much like a sign that Uber again takes an old path of silencing people and problems instead of fixing toxic culture. Makes me think that they also prepare to blackmail Fowler.

cbanek 10y ago

Seems like they have probably already started: https://twitter.com/susanthesquark/status/835193441814392833 https://twitter.com/susanthesquark/status/835193441814392833

BinaryIdiot 10y ago
This seems to be Uber's modus operandi every single time they're in trouble and it almost always seems to backfire on them, PR wise. I'm curious though, what tipped her off? While I've worked at tech start-ups before and can believe all the behavior she outlined (because I've seen similar things myself, it's very believable) it still bothers me to continue to take someone's word at face value. I mean I do, I would trust what she says over Uber any day, but I wish more of this type of information was verifiable.
- toyg 10y ago
  Likely an ex-colleague she kept in touch with, who tipped her that s/he had been tapped. I know I would react that way, if anyone started asking pointed questions about a friend.
- watwut 10y ago
  I find it fascinating that on one hand many people call what she described as standard and on the other people still call SV meritocracy. Even if you ignore sexism, the environment seemed to favor political maneuvring over skill and achievement.
  - beaconstudios 10y ago
    I don't think a whole region can really be called a meritocracy - that strikes me as a pervasive myth. It would seem that meritocracy is something that a lot of SV companies strive for, but you'll always get companies that operate like Uber where meritocracy takes a back seat to politics and posturing.
    - jordigh 10y ago
      While in principle being judged by nothing by your actions is a great, well, principle, in practice "meritocracy" ends up favouring people who were already socially advantaged in some way or another (e.g. male) to elicit the actions that the meritocratic judge is looking for. The idea sounds nice, but it ends up just reinforcing cronyism. If you belong to the right in-group, usually stratified along some social injustice, you'll display the merits that in-group wants.
      - beaconstudios 10y ago
        the point of a meritocracy is to produce the best possible work and reward good performance, not to right real or perceived injustices. Statistically speaking, if the majority of developers are male then a majority of high-performing developers will also be male. Hiring lower-performing females to attempt to achieve balance does not fix the original issue, and it serves to harm the hiring company by choosing people based on social group rather than skill. Solving underrepresentation issues is, in my opinion, more about changing the perception of the industry for those poorly represented groups and performing outreach at younger ages, rather than having companies hire disproportionately more women or people of colour so that their employees look more diverse. That doesn't really solve anything.
        jordigh 10y ago
        Okay, so when I object and say "cronyism" you hear "let's hire idiots just because they're women". It doesn't have to be either of these. A simple thing you can do is publicly state, "we encourage women and other minorities to apply". And that's all. You encourage them. You don't have to give them any preferential treatment to pad your numbers (and I don't think anyone ever really does that, but a lot of people seem to be afraid that it happens). You just have to explicitly direct your invitation to them. That's enough to increase your hiring pool and give your company culture a nudge in the right direction. If you object to the alleged benefits of having a diverse staff, I can't imagine you would object to attracting more people to apply who otherwise wouldn't. A further point I want to emphasise: what is merit? Who decides what is merit? If you think being nice to others has no merit (or is not "good performance"), then you may end up hiring toxic employees like Fowler's sexual harasser and then keep him around because of your merit metric. This will end up costing you good employees like Fowler.
- uberthrowaway1 10y ago
  Using a throwaway for obvious reasons. >This seems to be Uber's modus operandi every single time they're in trouble and it almost always seems to backfire on them, PR wise. From attending all hands meetings I get the sense TK has a victim mentality and sees himself doing no wrong or Uber doing no wrong. Since we're clearly not wrong, it has to be the critic, right? /S To be fair, we do get some BS scandals related to surge (they turned off surge for natural disasters! They're profiting off us! They left it on, they're profiting off our misery!) but almost all of our scandals are self inflicted. >I'm curious though, what tipped her off? I'd wager an employee. Employees are very angry now at leadership, and in our last few all hands / CTO speaking to everyone (something they put together just for this week I think) people questioned publicly what's been questioned in the shadows for a while. For instance, Uber has a list of stupid "cultural values" that include values like "always be hustling" (yes, it's a direct quote) and I've been in private conversations with people who find these values obnoxious and poorly written. Never raised to management though. But this all hands people threw these bullshit values at TK and Thuan and pointed out how bad they are, including this specific "always be hustling" value. The questioner even referenced Zootopia ("It's called a hustle, sweetheart") to skewer it. Also it was pointed out how our perf review process doesn't reward collaboration between teams at all (hence the politicking). Felt almost like a press conference with ace reporters fighting against an unprepared, incompetent politician. Our CTO even cried, which was a little dramatic for me. Happy to see I'm not the only angry employee.
  - alphonsegaston 10y ago
    Thanks for the insights. Question about the inside view - do people really buy Kalanick's fake apologies/victim act at this point? We've gone through this ruse so many times, from the outside it just seems like a laughable caricature of malignant narcissism. From your comments about the CTO, I'm guessing he surrounds himself with "empathizable cover" after the classic abusive pattern (if you come after me, think about the damage it will do to the nice people around me).
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- tn13 10y ago
  True. In most such cases there is always an another side that we totally forget when looking at the victim's story. I would give Uber a fair 50% chance unless there is strong evidence on the table.
dllthomas 10y ago
She says in her next tweet that she doesn't know who it is or what their aims are. I doubt Uber is attempting to smear her. I don't think the people involved are that evil, but I'm pretty confident they aren't that stupid.
- alphonsegaston 10y ago
  They previously (and probably illegally) hired a private intelligence firm to dig up dirt on their opponents in a court battle: http://www.theverge.com/2016/7/10/12127638/uber-ergo-investigation-lawsuit-fraud-travis-kalanick http://www.theverge.com/2016/7/10/12127638/uber-ergo-investi... They did the same to intimidate journalists: http://fortune.com/2014/11/18/uber-rides-into-new-pr-storm-over-digging-dirt-on-hostile-press/ http://fortune.com/2014/11/18/uber-rides-into-new-pr-storm-o...
  - dllthomas 10y ago
    To be clear, in this case I think it's quite unlikely, specifically, that Uber is looking for information with an intent to discredit, disparage, or defame Susan Fowler. > They previously (and probably illegally) hired a private intelligence firm to dig up dirt on their opponents in a court battle What was done there seems obviously inappropriate. It's unclear to what degree the intent was (I certainly understand wanting context). The situation was obviously very different. > They did the same to intimidate journalists Maybe. On the other hand: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-campbell/what-was-said-at-the-uber_b_6198250.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicole-campbell/what-was-said-... And even in the Ben Smith's account they didn't actually do it.
    - alphonsegaston 10y ago
      Why is it unlikely, given that they've done this exact thing in the past? You're entitled to think whatever you want, but you can't in good faith argue that this isn't their pattern of behavior. You're right that the circumstances are different, but the only constant is Uber underhandedly going after anyone who criticizes them. And an editorial in HuffPo from someone who pals around with the person engaging in the abusive behaviour is a pretty weak defense. Especially since they did a similar thing before: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/19/uber-investigates-top-executive-after-journalists-privacy-was-breached https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/19/uber-inve...

dominotw 10y ago

Huffington said this time all problems will be fixed. I trust her, can we give them some time before saying 'takes an old path '.

mcguire 10y ago
It's fun to listen to what people say, but you really need to watch what they do.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]