17 ms·

One of my favorite moments of 2020 was when coinbase stood up against the madness of people using the company as a vehicle to promote their irrelevant politics.

One of my favorite moments of 2020 was when coinbase stood up against the madness of people using the company as a vehicle to promote their irrelevant politics. Politics has its place but just gets in the way of doing work in the workplace. The only politics that should be promoted in the workplace is the politics that helps the company accomplish its specific goals. I predict that market forces will cause more startups to follow suit.

baby 6y ago
and then 5% (60 employees) of its taskforce quit, I remember that.
- kingTug 6y ago
  They were offered exit packages, iirc.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
zdragnar 6y ago
One of the things that made me quit my last job was the director frequently talking politics before meetings while waiting for everyone to join. There's no winning. Agree and risk setting yourself at odds against your peers and future managers, or disagree and put yourself at odds with the person who holds the purse for your team. Even worse, complain to HR, and risk politically disagreeing with them. I stuck with that job long enough to find something better, and almost regret staying with it as long as I did.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- manquer 6y ago
  Wasn't it possible to have politely told him 1:1 that talking politics is making you uncomfortable? Many times managers are just unaware that their actions cause discomfort, and feedback could help and it is on the manager to encourage that process. On a side note: small topics are always tricky , even sports can alienate co workers.
  - esyir 6y ago
    Considering the hostility that can be shown to those of the opposite tribe, especially in tech companies, are you surprised that op wouldn't challenge the higher in position director on such basis?
  - zdragnar 6y ago
    There were a dozen reasons I didn't. I shouldn't have had to I didn't want to be "that guy" Plenty of other commenters here would argue that doing so is really a political position (defending status quo), which would not at all be what I wanted to convey It formed a hostile work environment, but not in a way that I wad legally protected from The discussion wasn't simple honest debate or smalltalk, it was very much "did you see how team A person put down team B person last weekend? She was awesome!" I should also make clear, this person wasn't my boss, he was director of the department- my boss's boss. He also had approximately 1 to 2 hours overlap in work schedule, as he lived practically on the other side of the globe (we had a world-wide team).
    - manquer 6y ago
      I understand, it is boss(or super boss in the case) responsibility to be able to encourage feedback and open conversation. There is big difference between making small talk and using that time to be on the soap box , no boss should need feedback for that line. It is just that as a manager, I have been surprised how people think I would take offence on something and not mention it for a long time. I always considered it my responsibility to encourage my team even if they are 3-4 levels down to be able openly talk with me and tell me what I am doing wrong and how can i help them do their jobs better, if they are not able to do that, it is on me.
      - zdragnar 6y ago
        That is fair. Unfortunately, politics, like religion, can be deeply personal, and it is very difficult to predict how someone will react. If the company had a proper feedback mechanism- whereby I could have left feedback for him anonymously (so that only his boss would see my name) I might have felt more comfortable bringing it up.
adamsea 6y ago
If the workplace did not have its own issues I would agree. But, since, to take one example, sexism is a known problem in tech - and throughout corporate America and society, to be fair - in order to not have a sexist workplace, one would need to be proactive. Broadly speaking. Point being, it's easy to not want "politics" in the workplace when the workplace works well for you. If you're someone whom the workplace doesn't work well for, like a person of color, a pregnant woman, new mother, or new father, for that matter, well, then it's a different story. If you yourself believe that sexism/systemic racism aren't issues that show up (even inadvertently or despite the best intentions of individuals) in the workplace, well, then that's a different conversation entirely. I think this is different from someone in a position of power promoting a particular candidate in the workplace. That is more complex and problematic. The 2020 election was obviously an extreme example, and, tbh, with things like global warming, I think we'll be seeing more politics like that in the workplace, not less. Which, to me, means it's not an easy or one-size-fits all solution, but rather, a challenge which requires each of us to exercise care and our own judgement. For example, personally, I would have liked to see Hacker News take even a small explicit step of endorsing the Black Lives Matter movement (such as putting 'Black lives matter' on the top of the homepage), seeing as how it's one of the major civil rights issues of our present moment. I can also understand their concerns around doing so, even though I disagree with them. IMHO it's too easy for those of us doing well and making money to forget that the institutions we work for have a social impact and are a part of society.
- tuesdayrain 6y ago
  I agree with the phrase "black lives matter". But I absolutely do not support the political group "BLM", which stands for a number of liberal ideas that have nothing to do with black people. For example their "what we believe page" states: "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable." Frankly I think this idea has awful implications that BLM does not grasp. It has since been deleted, but can be found here https://web.archive.org/web/20200816155814/https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200816155814/https://blacklive...
tyre 6y ago
What’s interesting about that case is that >5% of employees quit. So these were people that coinbase decided, out of all available applicants—and as a well-known, hugely profitable company that is the only “in any way mainstream” success story of cryptocurrency-based businesses, there are a fair number of them—thought were the right fit. (That’s excluding the people who were given offers and didn’t accept, of course.) And then greater than one in twenty employees (that’s a lot) heard what he said and were like, nope, this is not someone I want to follow. Is that a success? Maybe! I can’t think of a time when we’ve seen that level of voluntary departure from a company and thought, “ah yes, this is good.” Or when we’ve seen something like that and thought, “ah yes, this is what leadership looks like.” Maybe he’s right! I don’t know. We’ll see. But when I look at America, with its staggering income inequality and tremendous corporate cash investments into political elections, I don’t personally think, “wow there sure is too much social accountability at companies.” You know? I don’t look at Facebook and think, “they should really just focus on being a data mining advertising business. This thing about fomenting extremism is distracting us from them as a corporate enterprise in a capitalist system.” Yikes.
- harrisonjackson 6y ago
  > nope, this is not someone I want to follow. People leave jobs for lots of reasons. Coinbase was offering a very generous exit package for anyone leaving at the time. I am sure some split for reasons unrelated to leadership or these political policies.
- blackearl 6y ago
  I hate the idea that massive corporations should be leading some progressive charge rather than holding our politicians accountable.
  - v4dok 6y ago
    Well, I think the hate of this idea should in general be more present in the past 20+ years of ever increasing corporation power in Politics.
- ThomPete 6y ago
free_rms 6y ago
The kicker here is that actual politics is prohibited by law. Companies can't be endorsing candidates or providing in-kind contributions without getting into trouble with the FEC. So this is all about performative poses in the workplace, on the topic of politics, rather than being about actual politics.
- TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
  Companies get involved with politics all the time, and policy in the US seems to be far more about keeping corporations and the shareholder class happy than keeping voters happy. So it's more that companies can't do certain limited things, but companies - and CEOs particularly - can do plenty of others.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - free_rms 6y ago
    Sure, in terms of lobbying, contributing to PACs, etc. But that's very rarely aligned with what the social justice activists want. What they get, instead, is a performative pacifier. Which IMO makes the problem worse as they realize how unsatisfying it is and demand more and more strenuous performance.
- tehjoker 6y ago
  There is something to what you're saying, but politics isn't only electoral. The two poles of attraction are pro-labor and pro-capital, so if startups do real politics in the workplace, it won't be to the benefit of anyone that isn't in management.
- hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
  Apparently you were never acquainted with the Citizens United SCOTUS decision.
  - free_rms 6y ago
hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
The other reason I totally agree with this is because there is always the unwritten rule that what a company can support politically is pretty much always in service to its bottom line. I mean, just look at Google, whose employees are known for being especially politically active. Except, that is, when it comes to the negative societal effect of large monopolies (there was a recent HN discussion about this). People at Google know what pays their (very large) salaries.
- bob33212 6y ago
  We don't get into politics until we need an emergency building permit approval at which point we will make a donation to the mayor's campaign even if he is a big Trump supporter and says things directly opposite of all the diversity meetings we have been going to over the past year.

baby 6y ago

and then 5% (60 employees) of its taskforce quit, I remember that.

kingTug 6y ago
They were offered exit packages, iirc.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

zdragnar 6y ago

One of the things that made me quit my last job was the director frequently talking politics before meetings while waiting for everyone to join. There's no winning. Agree and risk setting yourself at odds against your peers and future managers, or disagree and put yourself at odds with the person who holds the purse for your team. Even worse, complain to HR, and risk politically disagreeing with them. I stuck with that job long enough to find something better, and almost regret staying with it as long as I did.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
manquer 6y ago
Wasn't it possible to have politely told him 1:1 that talking politics is making you uncomfortable? Many times managers are just unaware that their actions cause discomfort, and feedback could help and it is on the manager to encourage that process. On a side note: small topics are always tricky , even sports can alienate co workers.
- esyir 6y ago
  Considering the hostility that can be shown to those of the opposite tribe, especially in tech companies, are you surprised that op wouldn't challenge the higher in position director on such basis?
- zdragnar 6y ago
  There were a dozen reasons I didn't. I shouldn't have had to I didn't want to be "that guy" Plenty of other commenters here would argue that doing so is really a political position (defending status quo), which would not at all be what I wanted to convey It formed a hostile work environment, but not in a way that I wad legally protected from The discussion wasn't simple honest debate or smalltalk, it was very much "did you see how team A person put down team B person last weekend? She was awesome!" I should also make clear, this person wasn't my boss, he was director of the department- my boss's boss. He also had approximately 1 to 2 hours overlap in work schedule, as he lived practically on the other side of the globe (we had a world-wide team).
  - manquer 6y ago
    I understand, it is boss(or super boss in the case) responsibility to be able to encourage feedback and open conversation. There is big difference between making small talk and using that time to be on the soap box , no boss should need feedback for that line. It is just that as a manager, I have been surprised how people think I would take offence on something and not mention it for a long time. I always considered it my responsibility to encourage my team even if they are 3-4 levels down to be able openly talk with me and tell me what I am doing wrong and how can i help them do their jobs better, if they are not able to do that, it is on me.
    - zdragnar 6y ago
      That is fair. Unfortunately, politics, like religion, can be deeply personal, and it is very difficult to predict how someone will react. If the company had a proper feedback mechanism- whereby I could have left feedback for him anonymously (so that only his boss would see my name) I might have felt more comfortable bringing it up.

adamsea 6y ago

If the workplace did not have its own issues I would agree. But, since, to take one example, sexism is a known problem in tech - and throughout corporate America and society, to be fair - in order to not have a sexist workplace, one would need to be proactive. Broadly speaking. Point being, it's easy to not want "politics" in the workplace when the workplace works well for you. If you're someone whom the workplace doesn't work well for, like a person of color, a pregnant woman, new mother, or new father, for that matter, well, then it's a different story. If you yourself believe that sexism/systemic racism aren't issues that show up (even inadvertently or despite the best intentions of individuals) in the workplace, well, then that's a different conversation entirely. I think this is different from someone in a position of power promoting a particular candidate in the workplace. That is more complex and problematic. The 2020 election was obviously an extreme example, and, tbh, with things like global warming, I think we'll be seeing more politics like that in the workplace, not less. Which, to me, means it's not an easy or one-size-fits all solution, but rather, a challenge which requires each of us to exercise care and our own judgement. For example, personally, I would have liked to see Hacker News take even a small explicit step of endorsing the Black Lives Matter movement (such as putting 'Black lives matter' on the top of the homepage), seeing as how it's one of the major civil rights issues of our present moment. I can also understand their concerns around doing so, even though I disagree with them. IMHO it's too easy for those of us doing well and making money to forget that the institutions we work for have a social impact and are a part of society.

tuesdayrain 6y ago
I agree with the phrase "black lives matter". But I absolutely do not support the political group "BLM", which stands for a number of liberal ideas that have nothing to do with black people. For example their "what we believe page" states: "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable." Frankly I think this idea has awful implications that BLM does not grasp. It has since been deleted, but can be found here https://web.archive.org/web/20200816155814/https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200816155814/https://blacklive...

tyre 6y ago

What’s interesting about that case is that >5% of employees quit. So these were people that coinbase decided, out of all available applicants—and as a well-known, hugely profitable company that is the only “in any way mainstream” success story of cryptocurrency-based businesses, there are a fair number of them—thought were the right fit. (That’s excluding the people who were given offers and didn’t accept, of course.) And then greater than one in twenty employees (that’s a lot) heard what he said and were like, nope, this is not someone I want to follow. Is that a success? Maybe! I can’t think of a time when we’ve seen that level of voluntary departure from a company and thought, “ah yes, this is good.” Or when we’ve seen something like that and thought, “ah yes, this is what leadership looks like.” Maybe he’s right! I don’t know. We’ll see. But when I look at America, with its staggering income inequality and tremendous corporate cash investments into political elections, I don’t personally think, “wow there sure is too much social accountability at companies.” You know? I don’t look at Facebook and think, “they should really just focus on being a data mining advertising business. This thing about fomenting extremism is distracting us from them as a corporate enterprise in a capitalist system.” Yikes.

harrisonjackson 6y ago
> nope, this is not someone I want to follow. People leave jobs for lots of reasons. Coinbase was offering a very generous exit package for anyone leaving at the time. I am sure some split for reasons unrelated to leadership or these political policies.
blackearl 6y ago
I hate the idea that massive corporations should be leading some progressive charge rather than holding our politicians accountable.
- v4dok 6y ago
  Well, I think the hate of this idea should in general be more present in the past 20+ years of ever increasing corporation power in Politics.
ThomPete 6y ago

free_rms 6y ago

The kicker here is that actual politics is prohibited by law. Companies can't be endorsing candidates or providing in-kind contributions without getting into trouble with the FEC. So this is all about performative poses in the workplace, on the topic of politics, rather than being about actual politics.

TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
Companies get involved with politics all the time, and policy in the US seems to be far more about keeping corporations and the shareholder class happy than keeping voters happy. So it's more that companies can't do certain limited things, but companies - and CEOs particularly - can do plenty of others.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- free_rms 6y ago
  Sure, in terms of lobbying, contributing to PACs, etc. But that's very rarely aligned with what the social justice activists want. What they get, instead, is a performative pacifier. Which IMO makes the problem worse as they realize how unsatisfying it is and demand more and more strenuous performance.
tehjoker 6y ago
There is something to what you're saying, but politics isn't only electoral. The two poles of attraction are pro-labor and pro-capital, so if startups do real politics in the workplace, it won't be to the benefit of anyone that isn't in management.
hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
Apparently you were never acquainted with the Citizens United SCOTUS decision.
- free_rms 6y ago

hn_throwaway_99 6y ago

The other reason I totally agree with this is because there is always the unwritten rule that what a company can support politically is pretty much always in service to its bottom line. I mean, just look at Google, whose employees are known for being especially politically active. Except, that is, when it comes to the negative societal effect of large monopolies (there was a recent HN discussion about this). People at Google know what pays their (very large) salaries.

bob33212 6y ago
We don't get into politics until we need an emergency building permit approval at which point we will make a donation to the mayor's campaign even if he is a big Trump supporter and says things directly opposite of all the diversity meetings we have been going to over the past year.