4 ms·

They knew the relationship was against company policy from the get go, what did they think was going happen? Two people made a poor decision and have to live w

by ProAm 7y ago

They knew the relationship was against company policy from the get go, what did they think was going happen? Two people made a poor decision and have to live with the consequences? > aware that our relationship was in violation of Google’s new policy which went from “discouraging” direct-reporting-line relationships to outright banning them.

ocdtrekkie 7y ago
Both people knew it was wrong, but Larry and Sergey's best buddy got promoted to become one of the most powerful executives on the planet and paid hundreds of millions of dollars, and the woman got pushed out of her job and left to support their kid herself.
- ProAm 7y ago
  She was forced out because it was against company policy. She wasnt forced out of google, but to a different department. And she voluntarily quit google, she was never fired. It's a sad story, but it's just adults making their own decisions that don't work out. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him
  - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
    And David wasn't forced out for violating company policy because...? He's a man? He's Larry and Sergey's friend?
    - ProAm 7y ago
      No one was forced out, HR said one of them had to leave. We dont know anything beyond that she was the one to change departments. She wasnt fired.
      - sokoloff 7y ago
        She worked for him in the legal department. If she's asked to change departments, what's someone presumably trained and skilled in law going to do? Start coding? Run a product team? Do sales?
        ProAm 7y ago
        Right, she had affair with her boss at a company where there was a clear policy against it. What was she supposed to do? Maybe think ahead and realize this is a bad idea, OR realize there are potential consequences for making said decisions. Regardless when google found out they did not fire her, they gave her a chance to continue employment at the company. I dont know what her qualifications were but if she managed to get hired at google I would imagine she could also find work relatively easily outside of google. >aware that our relationship was in violation of Google’s new policy which went from “discouraging” direct-reporting-line relationships to outright banning them
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        _jal 7y ago
        Dude just fades into the background, a fact she must make choices around, and anyway she must have landed OK, right? Amazing how senior execs in powerful places selectively lose agency.
        danso 7y ago
        Usually in these situations the onus should be on the senior colleague, because, besides the increased expectations of seniority, they have the power to punish a junior colleague for refusing sexual advances.
      - snowwrestler 7y ago
        > She was forced out because it was against company policy > No one was forced out
unapologetic 7y ago
He forced the consequences onto her. None of these men will ever actually face consequences. They are all obscenely wealthy and well connected.
- ProAm 7y ago
  What did he force onto her?
  - unapologetic 7y ago
    Well she's stuck raising the son of an emotionally abusive sociopath. Besides that he pressured her into quitting with promises of financial support, then left her with the baby and refused to pay. I can't even comprehend the type of person who doesn't see the cruelty of this man. She trusted the wrong person, that doesn't justify his behavior.
    - ProAm 7y ago
      I agree hes probably a terrible person, but I just dont see where he is abusing his power at Google. He didn't pressure her into a relationship, he didnt force himself upon her, didnt threaten her job if she didnt cooperate, he didnt pressure her into leaving, she even says so in the article. These both sound like people of poor judgement, I just dont see the abuse people are trying to levy. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him
    - d1zzy 7y ago
      > Well she's stuck raising the son of an emotionally abusive sociopath. She decided to have a child and she decided to raise them. These are choices she made. He decided he doesn't want to take part in raising his son. It sounds like you want her to get all the pros and him all the cons in this situation. But their decisions have both pros and cons for both of them. Her decision means she gets to have a family/child (at the cost of the work/money needed to raise a child). His decision means he's a bad father who will his son will likely always hate but it has its financial advantages. > Besides that he pressured her into quitting with promises of financial support, then left her with the baby and refused to pay. > > I can't even comprehend the type of person who doesn't see the cruelty of this man. She trusted the wrong person, that doesn't justify his behavior. Yes, he's a cruel liar. Probably most people would be if given the opportunity (yes I'm a cynic and I don't believe in natural/native human kindness) but I'm not trying to make excuses for him. From the article he seems like a terrible person. But so what, that's not illegal. In the end what are we trying to achieve by pointing this out?
vkou 7y ago
During manager training done by any lawyer worth their salt, it is drilled into you two hundred times that if you start a relationship with a subordinate, you have to declare this relationship to HR, you have to move jobs, and that you may be personally liable for any of the legal fallout that comes with workplace relationships/allegations of harassment/allegations of nepotism. It seems that the execs don't get the same kind of training that line managers get. Or, perhaps, they are protected from the consequences. One set of rules for me, another for you...

by ProAm 7y ago

ocdtrekkie 7y ago

Both people knew it was wrong, but Larry and Sergey's best buddy got promoted to become one of the most powerful executives on the planet and paid hundreds of millions of dollars, and the woman got pushed out of her job and left to support their kid herself.

ProAm 7y ago
She was forced out because it was against company policy. She wasnt forced out of google, but to a different department. And she voluntarily quit google, she was never fired. It's a sad story, but it's just adults making their own decisions that don't work out. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him
- ocdtrekkie 7y ago
  And David wasn't forced out for violating company policy because...? He's a man? He's Larry and Sergey's friend?
  - ProAm 7y ago
    No one was forced out, HR said one of them had to leave. We dont know anything beyond that she was the one to change departments. She wasnt fired.
    - sokoloff 7y ago
      She worked for him in the legal department. If she's asked to change departments, what's someone presumably trained and skilled in law going to do? Start coding? Run a product team? Do sales?
      - ProAm 7y ago
        Right, she had affair with her boss at a company where there was a clear policy against it. What was she supposed to do? Maybe think ahead and realize this is a bad idea, OR realize there are potential consequences for making said decisions. Regardless when google found out they did not fire her, they gave her a chance to continue employment at the company. I dont know what her qualifications were but if she managed to get hired at google I would imagine she could also find work relatively easily outside of google. >aware that our relationship was in violation of Google’s new policy which went from “discouraging” direct-reporting-line relationships to outright banning them
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        _jal 7y ago
        Dude just fades into the background, a fact she must make choices around, and anyway she must have landed OK, right? Amazing how senior execs in powerful places selectively lose agency.
        danso 7y ago
        Usually in these situations the onus should be on the senior colleague, because, besides the increased expectations of seniority, they have the power to punish a junior colleague for refusing sexual advances.
    - snowwrestler 7y ago
      > She was forced out because it was against company policy > No one was forced out

unapologetic 7y ago

He forced the consequences onto her. None of these men will ever actually face consequences. They are all obscenely wealthy and well connected.

ProAm 7y ago
What did he force onto her?
- unapologetic 7y ago
  Well she's stuck raising the son of an emotionally abusive sociopath. Besides that he pressured her into quitting with promises of financial support, then left her with the baby and refused to pay. I can't even comprehend the type of person who doesn't see the cruelty of this man. She trusted the wrong person, that doesn't justify his behavior.
  - ProAm 7y ago
    I agree hes probably a terrible person, but I just dont see where he is abusing his power at Google. He didn't pressure her into a relationship, he didnt force himself upon her, didnt threaten her job if she didnt cooperate, he didnt pressure her into leaving, she even says so in the article. These both sound like people of poor judgement, I just dont see the abuse people are trying to levy. > so I quit Google, signing whatever documents they required because likewise, I wanted to protect him
  - d1zzy 7y ago
    > Well she's stuck raising the son of an emotionally abusive sociopath. She decided to have a child and she decided to raise them. These are choices she made. He decided he doesn't want to take part in raising his son. It sounds like you want her to get all the pros and him all the cons in this situation. But their decisions have both pros and cons for both of them. Her decision means she gets to have a family/child (at the cost of the work/money needed to raise a child). His decision means he's a bad father who will his son will likely always hate but it has its financial advantages. > Besides that he pressured her into quitting with promises of financial support, then left her with the baby and refused to pay. > > I can't even comprehend the type of person who doesn't see the cruelty of this man. She trusted the wrong person, that doesn't justify his behavior. Yes, he's a cruel liar. Probably most people would be if given the opportunity (yes I'm a cynic and I don't believe in natural/native human kindness) but I'm not trying to make excuses for him. From the article he seems like a terrible person. But so what, that's not illegal. In the end what are we trying to achieve by pointing this out?

vkou 7y ago

During manager training done by any lawyer worth their salt, it is drilled into you two hundred times that if you start a relationship with a subordinate, you have to declare this relationship to HR, you have to move jobs, and that you may be personally liable for any of the legal fallout that comes with workplace relationships/allegations of harassment/allegations of nepotism. It seems that the execs don't get the same kind of training that line managers get. Or, perhaps, they are protected from the consequences. One set of rules for me, another for you...