4 ms·

Full disclosure: used to work for Alphabet, and while I seem to recall the sexual harassment training on this pretty well, take my word with a huge grain of sal

Full disclosure: used to work for Alphabet, and while I seem to recall the sexual harassment training on this pretty well, take my word with a huge grain of salt. Google has a pretty open-minded approach about relationships: you won't get fired for starting a relationship with a report/manager, but you are required to disclose it to management and take the appropriate steps to fix the power imbalance. Moving the parties to two different teams is one of the suggested solutions. I could see that being hard to achieve if you are in the board of directors, but it should work for the vast majority of employees. So my guess about this "inappropriate relationship" was that it wasn't reported and the proper actions weren't taken. I hope for everyone involved it was consensual and just an indiscretion, rather than something more perverse being at play.

agumonkey 9y ago
Very interesting, especially the fine grained handling of relationships by reorganizing to avoid biased work. You may be right about the real issue here
- perseusprime11 9y ago
  I am speculating that he may have given her a promotion without disclosing his relationship to HR.
  - dguaraglia 9y ago
    Yeah, that'd definitely be a huge issue. One interesting aspect people are missing in this thread is that the power dynamic goes both ways: a manager could coerce a report into a relationship or a report gets unfair advantage over their peers by exerting influence on their manager. Or both. Not only that, it opens the door to blackmailing. That's why the dynamic is bad and people trying to make a defense of it (I've seen co are misguided or haven't considered all the factors. There's a reason why there's a legal-approved training on this.
  - nappy-doo 9y ago
    no one gives promotions at Google. They go to a review committee who decides if the person is performing above their current level. It is possible he wrote for her promo committee packet, but managers are generally not as important as peers in the promo process.
    - dguaraglia 9y ago
      That's true, at least for most of the people I worked with. I'm not sure what the process is for administrative staff.
      - nappy-doo 9y ago
        It's the same, but harsher than tech.

agumonkey 9y ago

Very interesting, especially the fine grained handling of relationships by reorganizing to avoid biased work. You may be right about the real issue here

perseusprime11 9y ago
I am speculating that he may have given her a promotion without disclosing his relationship to HR.
- dguaraglia 9y ago
  Yeah, that'd definitely be a huge issue. One interesting aspect people are missing in this thread is that the power dynamic goes both ways: a manager could coerce a report into a relationship or a report gets unfair advantage over their peers by exerting influence on their manager. Or both. Not only that, it opens the door to blackmailing. That's why the dynamic is bad and people trying to make a defense of it (I've seen co are misguided or haven't considered all the factors. There's a reason why there's a legal-approved training on this.
- nappy-doo 9y ago
  no one gives promotions at Google. They go to a review committee who decides if the person is performing above their current level. It is possible he wrote for her promo committee packet, but managers are generally not as important as peers in the promo process.
  - dguaraglia 9y ago
    That's true, at least for most of the people I worked with. I'm not sure what the process is for administrative staff.
    - nappy-doo 9y ago
      It's the same, but harsher than tech.