3 ms·
Yes, advocating for improvements in labor conditions is protected. No, creating a hostile work environment in the course of such advocacy is not protected, no
by geofft 7y ago
Yes, advocating for improvements in labor conditions is protected.
No, creating a hostile work environment in the course of such advocacy is not protected, no matter how many scientists back you up. I recommend you read the NLRB decision: https://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d45826e6391 https://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d45826e6391
- zozbot234 7y agoAre you aware that Damore's memo was only sent to a specialized group of people who were specifically interested in diversity issues, and everything that happened thereafter (leading up to his firing) was the result of people leaking his memo in an abridged version which deleted all references to the actual science? Someone was very clearly creating a "hostile" work environment, right then and there - but it wasn't Damore.
- Craighead 7y agoYou clearly do not understand the entire history of the memo and seek to rewrite what occured to fit your naive narrative that an essay written about men being better with things and women being better with people isn't an insult to a company filled with women engineers let alone the fact that the authors of every single paper he quoted have refuted his claims as taking their meanings out of context to suit Damore's claims.
- geofft 7y agoI'm aware of this. I've argued at length over the Damore memo on this website before and I'm not interested in doing so again. (If you think the NLRB decided wrongly, convincing me does no good, convince the NLRB.) I am simply disputing that the Damore decision from the NLRB gives Google precedent to fire these employees. If you think Damore should have been even more protected by labor law than Damore was, great, then these employees were definitely protected and firing them was definitely illegal.