9 ms·
It was a joint request to dismiss with no further comment, ie, almost certainly a settlement & a nondisclosure agreement.
by kyrieeschaton 6y ago
It was a joint request to dismiss with no further comment, ie, almost certainly a settlement & a nondisclosure agreement.
- CalChris 6y agoProbably not much, court costs and some attorney's fees. They weren't winning.
- duxup 6y agoI'd be curious what the agreement is if only because it didn't seem like he had much in the way of a strong with case.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- koheripbal 6y agoAre you serious? He was fired for his political views.
- duxup 6y agoYou feel his case was strong?
- LurkersWillLurk 6y agoYou say this as though it's plainly obvious that it wasn't. The truth is that it depends, and not on whether or not we think his political views are ridiculous. The causes of action in the lawsuit were unlawful termination on account of political activities (which are protected in California) and sex (which is protected federally). Google made three motions to dismiss and lost all of them. Does that mean Google is guilty? Of course not. All it means is that the claim stated by Damore, if true, could convince a reasonable jury that Google violated his civil rights. Google would much rather pay out settlement money than risk having an unflattering jury verdict or have to release even more unflattering documents in discovery. I'm sure Damore would rather not go to trial if he could help it as well.
- duxup 6y agoI'm not convinced it was because of his "political views" is an automatic fact. People say "political views", that's how he might frame it, but I would assume Google would frame it as they fired him for making statements that women are less capable.
- rbanffy 6y agoIt could be considered political in countries and political systems that consider women as second class citizens and bar them from holding elected office or other positions of responsibility, or if he was advocating for the adoption of such model.
- mdorazio 6y agoThen they would lose because he did not say that.
- afiori 6y agoI feel this comment is a good summation of this conversation. I do not know whether you would agree with the presumed Google's opinion, but a big part of this entire "scandal" is that Damore never said that women are less capable.
- ryan-c 6y agoAre there protected classes based on political views? If someone is expressing political or even religious views that are so extreme that they create a hostile work environment, I don't see an issue with firing them over it. (I am not interested in debating whether or not Damore's views reached the "hostile work environment" threshold)
- LurkersWillLurk 6y agoNone federally. In California, "political activities" are a protected class. The extent to which activities and views overlap is almost certainly a messy question of law that I'm not qualified to answer with respect to Damore.
- dx87 6y agoCalifornia treats political views as a protected class.
- roenxi 6y ago> If someone is expressing political or even religious views that are so extreme that they create a hostile work environment, I don't see an issue with firing them over it. There is a process, and step one in that process is asking them to please stop sharing their views in the workplace. Expressing extremely wrong views can't be the standard for creating a hostile work environment because people are wrong about a bunch of stuff and the only way to figure that out is to express the view and be told why it is wrong. Particularly in the Damore case, the standard shouldn't be how a third party feels. There is a long history of seeing how that standard plays out, it'll end up hurting minority voices. The standard needs to be how a first party responds when asked to do something.
- rbanffy 6y agoIs sexism a political view? Edit: burn, karma, burn
- TA0x0 6y agoFacts are sexist and racist!
- TA0x0 6y agoAre facts racist and sexist?
- shadowgovt 6y agoHistory shows interpretation of facts can be extremely racist and sexist. Phrenology and hysteria both come to mind.
- TA0x0 6y agoPhrenology and hysteria are not facts, and their interpretations are not facts either. Some facts are not open to interpretation.
- shadowgovt 6y agoThey were definitely understood to be facts at the time people believed them.
- TA0x0 6y agoThose were theories to describe specific phenomenas, not facts. Knock knock, science 101 is at the door calling for you.
- TA0x0 6y agoThose were theories to describe specific phenomenas, not facts. Certain facts are indisputable and not open to interpretation: FACT: African-Americans are more likely to commit violent crimes than Asian Americans.
- afiori 6y agoThe case could be constructed as being fired due to the backlash caused to google. Damore would have had to prove that there was a active discrimination at google toward some political views. He had some good evidence for that (in terms of internal conversations and witnesses) but it is not so clear whether that was enough, or even if it was necessarily illegal in this case.
- shadowgovt 6y agoOnce the NLRB disagreed with that assessment, his case got pretty weak.
- tyingq 6y agoDon't know if it was strong, but a judge did dismiss Google's motions to toss it out of arbitration last year. https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/06/07/google-discrimination-case-first-brought-by-james-damore-can-proceed/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/06/07/google-discrimination...
- lettergram 6y agoMy thoughts as well - makes sense. It's going to continue to bring Google a headache, especially with conservatism on the apparent rise (i.e. still could have Trump in 2024). Far easier to settle with a non-disclosure clause and an agreement to halt all public appearances. James Damore went on a campaign of visiting universities and other locations to discuss his views. Honestly, it was a good move, his case was weak, but the publicity seems to have paid off.
- saagarjha 6y ago> still could have Trump in 2024 You mean you think he'll lose this election but come back to win the next one?
- mirimir 6y agoMaybe Trump Jr ;)
- toyg 6y agoWouldn’t put it past him. Berlusconi kinda did that, alternating wins and losses fairly regularly over 20 years (while his opponents changed every few years). I think he started younger than Trump though.
- znpy 6y agoAs an Italian, I would still prefer Berlusconi to Trump for presidency. Still not my first choice (and not high on my preference list) but still better than Trump.
- bobmcbobface 6y ago"Italian"
- marktangotango 6y agoExactly this; I just wonder what the settlement amount was. Seven figures plus certainly. I applaud anyone who sticks it to a mega corp, politics be damned! Edit down voters love mega corps?
- CydeWeys 6y agoI wonder if it's enough for him to retire on, because I don't see how he could work in the industry again. I sure as hell wouldn't want to go out that way though, even for fuck you money.