6 ms·
Are you serious? He was fired for his political views.
by koheripbal 7y ago
Are you serious? He was fired for his political views.
- duxup 7y agoYou feel his case was strong?
- LurkersWillLurk 7y 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 7y 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 7y 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 7y agoThen they would lose because he did not say that.
- afiori 7y 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 7y 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 7y 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 7y agoCalifornia treats political views as a protected class.
- roenxi 7y 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 7y agoIs sexism a political view? Edit: burn, karma, burn
- TA0x0 7y agoFacts are sexist and racist!
- TA0x0 7y agoAre facts racist and sexist?
- shadowgovt 7y agoHistory shows interpretation of facts can be extremely racist and sexist. Phrenology and hysteria both come to mind.
- TA0x0 7y agoPhrenology and hysteria are not facts, and their interpretations are not facts either. Some facts are not open to interpretation.
- shadowgovt 7y agoThey were definitely understood to be facts at the time people believed them.
- TA0x0 7y agoThose were theories to describe specific phenomenas, not facts. Knock knock, science 101 is at the door calling for you.
- TA0x0 7y 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 7y 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 7y agoOnce the NLRB disagreed with that assessment, his case got pretty weak.