5 ms·

Although it has settled the case, Google denies the allegations that it was unfairly dismissive of older applicants. Why is Google still making denials and sta

by dvtrn 7y ago

Although it has settled the case, Google denies the allegations that it was unfairly dismissive of older applicants. Why is Google still making denials and statements after settling the action?

geodel 7y ago
Maybe because it is settled and not proven in court?
- dvtrn 7y ago
  Maybe because it is settled Right, this is why it confuses me because it's been declared settled, a formal resolution outside of the court, the matter is resolved independently between the parties. It seems odd to settle this kind of class-action allegation while continue making statements about it after the fact. Is my understanding of this incorrect?
  - will4274 7y ago
    Yes. Companies often issue press statements after settling a case.
  - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
    Settlement offers this fun gap where they've paid people to not pursue them further, but don't have to actually admit they did anything wrong. And obviously, Google doesn't want people to believe they discriminate against people unfairly, so of course if they legally can, they're going to stand by their position that they don't. Even if they do and had to pay people to settle a case for it.
    - dvtrn 7y ago
      And obviously, Google doesn't want people to believe they discriminate against people unfairly, so of course if they legally can, they're going to stand by their position that they don't This is about on par with where my thinking was on this. I'm aware that these settlements are often contingent upon agreements from both parties regarding disclosing details of the settlement, and I suppose I assumed there was something in place here that prevented parties from speaking out about the settlement other than to release a statement saying 'a settlement was reached'. Evidently not the case here. Thanks.
      - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
        I think it's common to forbid the parties from saying derogatory comments about the other party. Google can continue to say whatever it wants about itself. Aka, the plaintiffs probably can't argue with Google's claim that they don't age discriminate, and Google probably can't say bad things about the people that sued them for it. But Google can continue to claim it treats all applicants fairly.
cheeze 7y ago
Because sometimes it's cheaper to settle, even if you didn't do something.
- rchaud 7y ago
  Google has salaried in-house counsel. I'm pretty sure they could afford to go to court more easily than the plaintiffs.
  - chadash 7y ago
    Companies settle all the time. It's common for insurance claims, for example. At a not-for-profit organization I'm involved with, a homeless person punched someone on the sidewalk outside their property. The victim then turned around and sued the organization, who had nothing to do with the incident except that it technically happened on their property (which is in an urban area). The president of the organization wanted to fight the case in court (on principle, because he felt that he shouldn't be liable, though he did express sympathy to the victim). The not-for-profit's insurance company wanted none of it and they settled for something like 50K. I'm sure that the insurance company has better lawyers than your average joe, but I'm also sure that they run the numbers and look at the risks (financial and reputational) and then make a decision whether to fight a case in court or not.
    - glenneroo 7y ago
      What kind of person sues a homeless person or an organization housing the homeless?
      - chadash 7y ago
        a) to be fair, this homeless person punched them in the face b) the organization does medical research, not work with the homeless. It just happens to be that the victim was walking on their property when a homeless person who was also passing by punched them in the face. The victim was indeed hurt and needed to go to the hospital. But the president of the organization felt that someone getting punched on the sidewalk (which is in an urban area... we're not talking a large property) was unfortunate, but not something his org should be responsible for. However, the insurance company didn't want to deal with the lawsuit, so they settled.
technofiend 7y ago
>Why is Google still making denials and statements after settling the action? You know that thing we totally denied? Now that we've settled, we can admit it. Cue four thousand new lawsuits That's why.
panpanna 7y ago
Because last time Google denied doing something like this it turned out there was a paper trail all the way to the CEO. (The top email basically said: why are you emailing me this. This is illegal. Don't create a paper trail!!)
- warunsl 7y ago
  Source?
  - panpanna 7y ago
    https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage-fixing-cartel-involved-dozens-more-companies-over-one-million-employees/ https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage... Another fun fact from that lawsuit: Steve Jobs threatened Palm with a patent war if they didn't join the cartel. Oh, it was a fun time to work in the valley...
    - panpanna 7y ago
      Actual quote if you didn't find it: Eric Schmidt: "I would prefer that Omid do it verbally since I don’t want to create a paper trail over which we can be sued later? Not sure about this.. thanks Eric"
- zippy 7y ago
  Google has a history of age discrimination and losing in court, going back to the founders of the company. See Reid v Google where Brian Reid, a key developer of the tech we use, was told his ideas "were too old to matter" and that he was an "old fuddy duddy." Google fought it and lost. https://www.law.com/therecorder/almID/1202464321723/?slreturn=20190622134543 https://www.law.com/therecorder/almID/1202464321723/?slretur... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reid_(computer_scientist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reid_(computer_scientist...
  - rasz 7y ago
    >Google fought it and lost. "The case was settled out of court", settlement is not a loss, its being allowed to sweep your dirty deeds under the rug with no consequences.
la_barba 7y ago
Why would they now admit to doing something illegal? They just settled the case!
sjg007 7y ago
They settled and deny wrongdoing to limit the impact. Now we have to wait for another set of age discrimination lawsuits to get more info about Google's practices... or we have to wait for the Government to get involved. Settling, basically tries to get the fire out before the Government decides to see what is going on. Given that Google has a hiring committee that reviews all applicants, this doesn't look good for Google... It'd be hard to argue that it's just a few managers and that it isn't a systematic issue rather than an "unconscious bias". Any company arguing "culture fit" in hiring decisions is making a poor argument. It's also hypocritical when they state that they want "diversity" in opinions, workers, etc... We may also get more insight if/when Google goes after Federal contracts which have reporting requirements and stronger applicant protections.
paxys 7y ago
That's the entire point of settling vs going to trial. The problem goes away and they don't have to admit to anything. They also make the plaintiffs sign lengthy NDAs to prevent them from saying anything about it.
inlined 7y ago
> Why is Google still making denials and statements after settling the action? This is standard in any settlement, which is typically a release of liability. Part of the boilerplate in these contracts is that both parties are compromising not because of guilt but because of the uncertainty of litigation. Even were Google in the right, a long protracted legal battle against claimed discrimination will constantly remind people that there’s alleged age discrimination. Nipping the negative PR in the bud is probably clearly worth it. As an aside, ageism is pretty apparent in most companies where I’ve worked. There’s a huge expectation of “up or out”. I was on a hiring committee where I’m ashamed I didn’t stand up for a candidate who the committee decided had too much “experience” to be slotted at level X and therefore not offered any job. At least that shame gave me the courage to speak up the next time I ended up in that position.

by dvtrn 7y ago

Although it has settled the case, Google denies the allegations that it was unfairly dismissive of older applicants. Why is Google still making denials and statements after settling the action?

geodel 7y ago

Maybe because it is settled and not proven in court?

dvtrn 7y ago
Maybe because it is settled Right, this is why it confuses me because it's been declared settled, a formal resolution outside of the court, the matter is resolved independently between the parties. It seems odd to settle this kind of class-action allegation while continue making statements about it after the fact. Is my understanding of this incorrect?
- will4274 7y ago
  Yes. Companies often issue press statements after settling a case.
- ocdtrekkie 7y ago
  Settlement offers this fun gap where they've paid people to not pursue them further, but don't have to actually admit they did anything wrong. And obviously, Google doesn't want people to believe they discriminate against people unfairly, so of course if they legally can, they're going to stand by their position that they don't. Even if they do and had to pay people to settle a case for it.
  - dvtrn 7y ago
    And obviously, Google doesn't want people to believe they discriminate against people unfairly, so of course if they legally can, they're going to stand by their position that they don't This is about on par with where my thinking was on this. I'm aware that these settlements are often contingent upon agreements from both parties regarding disclosing details of the settlement, and I suppose I assumed there was something in place here that prevented parties from speaking out about the settlement other than to release a statement saying 'a settlement was reached'. Evidently not the case here. Thanks.
    - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
      I think it's common to forbid the parties from saying derogatory comments about the other party. Google can continue to say whatever it wants about itself. Aka, the plaintiffs probably can't argue with Google's claim that they don't age discriminate, and Google probably can't say bad things about the people that sued them for it. But Google can continue to claim it treats all applicants fairly.

cheeze 7y ago

Because sometimes it's cheaper to settle, even if you didn't do something.

rchaud 7y ago
Google has salaried in-house counsel. I'm pretty sure they could afford to go to court more easily than the plaintiffs.
- chadash 7y ago
  Companies settle all the time. It's common for insurance claims, for example. At a not-for-profit organization I'm involved with, a homeless person punched someone on the sidewalk outside their property. The victim then turned around and sued the organization, who had nothing to do with the incident except that it technically happened on their property (which is in an urban area). The president of the organization wanted to fight the case in court (on principle, because he felt that he shouldn't be liable, though he did express sympathy to the victim). The not-for-profit's insurance company wanted none of it and they settled for something like 50K. I'm sure that the insurance company has better lawyers than your average joe, but I'm also sure that they run the numbers and look at the risks (financial and reputational) and then make a decision whether to fight a case in court or not.
  - glenneroo 7y ago
    What kind of person sues a homeless person or an organization housing the homeless?
    - chadash 7y ago
      a) to be fair, this homeless person punched them in the face b) the organization does medical research, not work with the homeless. It just happens to be that the victim was walking on their property when a homeless person who was also passing by punched them in the face. The victim was indeed hurt and needed to go to the hospital. But the president of the organization felt that someone getting punched on the sidewalk (which is in an urban area... we're not talking a large property) was unfortunate, but not something his org should be responsible for. However, the insurance company didn't want to deal with the lawsuit, so they settled.

technofiend 7y ago

>Why is Google still making denials and statements after settling the action? You know that thing we totally denied? Now that we've settled, we can admit it. Cue four thousand new lawsuits That's why.

panpanna 7y ago

Because last time Google denied doing something like this it turned out there was a paper trail all the way to the CEO. (The top email basically said: why are you emailing me this. This is illegal. Don't create a paper trail!!)

warunsl 7y ago
Source?
- panpanna 7y ago
  https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage-fixing-cartel-involved-dozens-more-companies-over-one-million-employees/ https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage... Another fun fact from that lawsuit: Steve Jobs threatened Palm with a patent war if they didn't join the cartel. Oh, it was a fun time to work in the valley...
  - panpanna 7y ago
    Actual quote if you didn't find it: Eric Schmidt: "I would prefer that Omid do it verbally since I don’t want to create a paper trail over which we can be sued later? Not sure about this.. thanks Eric"
zippy 7y ago
Google has a history of age discrimination and losing in court, going back to the founders of the company. See Reid v Google where Brian Reid, a key developer of the tech we use, was told his ideas "were too old to matter" and that he was an "old fuddy duddy." Google fought it and lost. https://www.law.com/therecorder/almID/1202464321723/?slreturn=20190622134543 https://www.law.com/therecorder/almID/1202464321723/?slretur... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reid_(computer_scientist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reid_(computer_scientist...
- rasz 7y ago
  >Google fought it and lost. "The case was settled out of court", settlement is not a loss, its being allowed to sweep your dirty deeds under the rug with no consequences.

la_barba 7y ago

Why would they now admit to doing something illegal? They just settled the case!

sjg007 7y ago

They settled and deny wrongdoing to limit the impact. Now we have to wait for another set of age discrimination lawsuits to get more info about Google's practices... or we have to wait for the Government to get involved. Settling, basically tries to get the fire out before the Government decides to see what is going on. Given that Google has a hiring committee that reviews all applicants, this doesn't look good for Google... It'd be hard to argue that it's just a few managers and that it isn't a systematic issue rather than an "unconscious bias". Any company arguing "culture fit" in hiring decisions is making a poor argument. It's also hypocritical when they state that they want "diversity" in opinions, workers, etc... We may also get more insight if/when Google goes after Federal contracts which have reporting requirements and stronger applicant protections.

paxys 7y ago

That's the entire point of settling vs going to trial. The problem goes away and they don't have to admit to anything. They also make the plaintiffs sign lengthy NDAs to prevent them from saying anything about it.

inlined 7y ago

> Why is Google still making denials and statements after settling the action? This is standard in any settlement, which is typically a release of liability. Part of the boilerplate in these contracts is that both parties are compromising not because of guilt but because of the uncertainty of litigation. Even were Google in the right, a long protracted legal battle against claimed discrimination will constantly remind people that there’s alleged age discrimination. Nipping the negative PR in the bud is probably clearly worth it. As an aside, ageism is pretty apparent in most companies where I’ve worked. There’s a huge expectation of “up or out”. I was on a hiring committee where I’m ashamed I didn’t stand up for a candidate who the committee decided had too much “experience” to be slotted at level X and therefore not offered any job. At least that shame gave me the courage to speak up the next time I ended up in that position.