6 ms·

Looks like they hired him without complete background check. Its good attempt. This will look like PR stunt unless they step-up and take action on their long-te

by giis 10y ago

Looks like they hired him without complete background check. Its good attempt. This will look like PR stunt unless they step-up and take action on their long-term employee(s) - regardless of high performer or not - who might have involved in the harassments.

ykzui 10y ago
I think the more plausible occurrence is that Kalanick knew about it before hiring him, then hired him anyway, and only fired him after the Susan Fowler story came out. Surely someone of Kalanick's stature would have been able to find out about this through back channels when he was vetting Singhal.
tbrowbdidnso 10y ago
I think it's insane that "allegations" of harassment are enough to get you fired. That sets the bar far too low, below any standard of evidence. Replace google with some shit company that didn't want you to leave and you'll see what I mean. I warned my boss at my current job that my last one ain't gonna be too happy about me leaving since I was nearly irreplaceable. I'm still betting they said terrible things about me, but what kind of bullshit evidence is that?
- untog 10y ago
  According to the article, he was not fired because of the allegations, but fired because he did not disclose the nature of his departure from Google. When you're a high up enough executive you need to be trustworthy - his first action with the company proved that he isn't.
  - tbrowbdidnso 10y ago
    He resigned on his own terms. I know executives pull that crap all the time to avoid getting "fired" but the fact is he quit voluntarily
    - lbatx 10y ago
      There is something called "lying by omission" or telling the truth, but not the whole truth. Also, if you are told to resign or you will be fired, that's not resigning on your own terms.
    - FireBeyond 10y ago
      The last few places I interviewed at specifically asked this. "Have you ever been involuntarily terminated, or voluntarily resigned to avoid termination?"
- chetanahuja 10y ago
  If Amit didn't reveal that he had forced out (whether he officially resigned or was fired is a distinction without a difference) of Google after an investigation of serious charges against him, then that's a good enough reason to fire a top executive.
- exolymph 10y ago
  Businesses are very risk-averse.
- ebola1717 10y ago
  HN should really ban throwaway accounts on sensitive threads. In any case, if you don't at least know that the response to your comment will be that allegations of harassment more often result in retaliation against the accuser than punishment of the accused - between the multiple Uber fiascoes, Casey Affleck, Brock Turner, etc. - then I find it hard to believe you're trying to listen in good faith.
CodeWriter23 10y ago
It'd be a good PR stunt if he was white. Racism is in the mix, see "Amy's" (pseudonym) post on Medium.
- chetanahuja 10y ago
  It's fairly easy to agree that this action is not enough to get Uber off the hook and can indeed be thought as a PR stunt. But why do you think Amit Singhal's race is a factor here?
  - CodeWriter23 10y ago
    Have you read this? https://medium.com/@amyvertino/my-name-is-not-amy-i-am-an-uber-survivor-c6d6541e632f https://medium.com/@amyvertino/my-name-is-not-amy-i-am-an-ub... It seems racism is another aspect of Uber's culture. Since the narrative is Kalanick sets the culture, and he chose to fire the brown guy who has no apparent complaints from Uber co-workers instead of firing the white guy mentioned in Amy's post, who has actual complaints against him, it would seem firing Amit was a racially-motivated choice of scapegoat. He's obviously hoping to feed this into the news cycle to make the negative attention go away so he can resume business as usual with no real change. My point is if he had fired Amy's perpetrator it might have worked. But with her adding allegations of racism to the mix, this stunt fails.
orange_county 10y ago
Most background checks only look at criminal records. So something that is conducted privately would not even show up. Anyways, like many others I feel like this guy is just a scapegoat considering the fact that he has only been at Uber for a month. On the other hand, what is Uber supposed to do here? They found out somehow that Google has done an internal investigation that he has been accused of sexual harassment before. If they do not ask him to resign, people would be outside with their pitchforks knowing that they have a possible sexual offender working for them.
tyingq 10y ago
There probably wasn't any way to know. Guessing someone at Google just leaked it, perhaps related to the Waymo feud with Uber. Or perhaps his accuser, or someone familiar with her, saw the timing would have been optimal to shoot an email to an Uber board member.

by giis 10y ago

ykzui 10y ago

I think the more plausible occurrence is that Kalanick knew about it before hiring him, then hired him anyway, and only fired him after the Susan Fowler story came out. Surely someone of Kalanick's stature would have been able to find out about this through back channels when he was vetting Singhal.

tbrowbdidnso 10y ago

I think it's insane that "allegations" of harassment are enough to get you fired. That sets the bar far too low, below any standard of evidence. Replace google with some shit company that didn't want you to leave and you'll see what I mean. I warned my boss at my current job that my last one ain't gonna be too happy about me leaving since I was nearly irreplaceable. I'm still betting they said terrible things about me, but what kind of bullshit evidence is that?

untog 10y ago
According to the article, he was not fired because of the allegations, but fired because he did not disclose the nature of his departure from Google. When you're a high up enough executive you need to be trustworthy - his first action with the company proved that he isn't.
- tbrowbdidnso 10y ago
  He resigned on his own terms. I know executives pull that crap all the time to avoid getting "fired" but the fact is he quit voluntarily
  - lbatx 10y ago
    There is something called "lying by omission" or telling the truth, but not the whole truth. Also, if you are told to resign or you will be fired, that's not resigning on your own terms.
  - FireBeyond 10y ago
    The last few places I interviewed at specifically asked this. "Have you ever been involuntarily terminated, or voluntarily resigned to avoid termination?"
chetanahuja 10y ago
If Amit didn't reveal that he had forced out (whether he officially resigned or was fired is a distinction without a difference) of Google after an investigation of serious charges against him, then that's a good enough reason to fire a top executive.
exolymph 10y ago
Businesses are very risk-averse.
ebola1717 10y ago
HN should really ban throwaway accounts on sensitive threads. In any case, if you don't at least know that the response to your comment will be that allegations of harassment more often result in retaliation against the accuser than punishment of the accused - between the multiple Uber fiascoes, Casey Affleck, Brock Turner, etc. - then I find it hard to believe you're trying to listen in good faith.

CodeWriter23 10y ago

It'd be a good PR stunt if he was white. Racism is in the mix, see "Amy's" (pseudonym) post on Medium.

chetanahuja 10y ago
It's fairly easy to agree that this action is not enough to get Uber off the hook and can indeed be thought as a PR stunt. But why do you think Amit Singhal's race is a factor here?
- CodeWriter23 10y ago
  Have you read this? https://medium.com/@amyvertino/my-name-is-not-amy-i-am-an-uber-survivor-c6d6541e632f https://medium.com/@amyvertino/my-name-is-not-amy-i-am-an-ub... It seems racism is another aspect of Uber's culture. Since the narrative is Kalanick sets the culture, and he chose to fire the brown guy who has no apparent complaints from Uber co-workers instead of firing the white guy mentioned in Amy's post, who has actual complaints against him, it would seem firing Amit was a racially-motivated choice of scapegoat. He's obviously hoping to feed this into the news cycle to make the negative attention go away so he can resume business as usual with no real change. My point is if he had fired Amy's perpetrator it might have worked. But with her adding allegations of racism to the mix, this stunt fails.

orange_county 10y ago

Most background checks only look at criminal records. So something that is conducted privately would not even show up. Anyways, like many others I feel like this guy is just a scapegoat considering the fact that he has only been at Uber for a month. On the other hand, what is Uber supposed to do here? They found out somehow that Google has done an internal investigation that he has been accused of sexual harassment before. If they do not ask him to resign, people would be outside with their pitchforks knowing that they have a possible sexual offender working for them.

tyingq 10y ago

There probably wasn't any way to know. Guessing someone at Google just leaked it, perhaps related to the Waymo feud with Uber. Or perhaps his accuser, or someone familiar with her, saw the timing would have been optimal to shoot an email to an Uber board member.