Rubin wasn't fired, he resigned. Google seem to have paid out his severance package. It's possible they could have fired him, citing sexual misconduct; then the

Rubin wasn't fired, he resigned. Google seem to have paid out his severance package. It's possible they could have fired him, citing sexual misconduct; then they would most likely have to content with a lawsuit by him for wrongful firing, and all the details would have to leak out. There are a myriad of reasons why Google would not want this: 1) They did not have enough evidence to fight in court - the article claims Google thought the accusations were "credible", but not necessarily proven. This could easily be a disaster for Google which can easily go away with some money and a resignation. 2) Even if they had enough evidence, the damage to their public image from this would be substantial, which could be costlier than the "payout". 3) The majority of controlling shareholders(Brin, Page, Schmidt) want to remain on good terms with Rubin and are willing to sacrifice the money to do so, thus fulfilling the responsibility to the shareholders angle. How would you ban this type of behavior?