3 ms·
No, it feels like wilful cognitive dissonance where you all seem to think having two coworkers of no real managerial importance signing off on your company-wide
by downdown4eva 7y ago
No, it feels like wilful cognitive dissonance where you all seem to think having two coworkers of no real managerial importance signing off on your company-wide political statement is somehow 'by the book' and everyone else is just a shill, ignorant and somehow didn't read this press release for this poor, poor person who knew exactly what would happen.
EDIT: Let's read the second paragraph of the article again:
"each time Google employees visited the website of IRI Consultants — the Troy, Michigan, firm that Google hired this year amid a groundswell of labor activism at the company"
You see that phrase 'labor activism'? This is the exact cognitive dissonance I am describing here. You want to pretend activism isn't political, that an employee planting a message on the website of a company affiliated with their employer related to this political subject is totally innocent and not a politically charged message. Just 'totally telling you your rights' and nothing more than that. That's intellectually dishonest.
- PhasmaFelis 7y agoIt's an odd world we live in where factual information about legal rights is dismissed as a "political statement". As others have said, if she'd abused her access to insert, say, a pithy pop-up about recycling on Earth Day, she would have received a slap on the wrist at the very worst. This isn't about changing the code without authorization. This is about a message Google doesn't want employees to hear.
- zozbot234 7y agoIt's not a "political" statement, it's a notice of Googlers' existing obligations under labor law and pursuant to a NLRB settlement. She was indeed correct to warn any Googlers who might interact with the external consulting firm about those obligations.