5 ms·
Protected activities are protected. You'll notice from the text of that article that some of the retaliation stopped once a lawyer got involved.
by compiler-guy 8y ago
Protected activities are protected. You'll notice from the text of that article that some of the retaliation stopped once a lawyer got involved.
- java-man 8y agoI am sure they'll be moved to a different project and then subsequently fired for "performance reasons".
- Jasper_ 8y agoThat is also against the law. From https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/retaliation.cfm https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/retaliation.cfm > For example, depending on the facts, it could be retaliation if an employer acts because of the employee's EEO activity to: > * transfer the employee to a less desirable position;
- malcolmgreaves 8y agoThank goodness for the labor movement.
- kolbe 8y agoThe problem with that, like so many laws, is that you have to prove motive for the law to work. I'm sure the previous commenter is not so naive as to think companies give a formal, written demotion stating that their EEO activity was the reason.
- perfmode 8y agoNot anymore you don’t. It’s easy nowadays to conceal motive through indirection.
- hnal943 8y agoThere are lots of reasons the involvement of lawyers could slow things down. That doesn't mean that Google was behaving illegally.