5 ms·

> While I’m a spectator to this unfolding story and am reacting to a pretty cursory overview of what happened, this has the distinct feeling that Google thought

> While I’m a spectator to this unfolding story and am reacting to a pretty cursory overview of what happened, this has the distinct feeling that Google thought they were moving in for a checkmate by, in their words, “accepting a resignation”, only to have it — very predictably? - blow up in their faces completely. I wouldn't say this has blown up in their face. But to be honest, I've not seen that much drama about it than one post. Have I been missing something? This seems a very solid move from Google. Someone tried to bully their way into getting information from Google they shouldn't give out. If you go to HR in confidence that confidence should be upheld. The fact someone had to go to HR for a peer review and the fact it was upheld states something. If someone says "Do X or I'll quit" when you're not going to do X, it is a resigination and seems quite standard that they don't want such an active detractor within their company ranks. I believe she basically sent an email to fellow employees basically telling them to stop working. That alone is a firable. That is completely nuts and unacceptable work place behaviour. The fact Google didn't fire her for that should speak volumes. To me, from a HR point of view, this is completely the right move to make.

zaksoup 6y ago
If somebody used HR as the mechanism to communicate feedback on the scientific rigor of research I was leading I would also find that concerning and objectionable. Human Resources is not peer review.
- that_guy_iain 6y ago
  Honestly, if someone had to use HR to give feedback on anything, I would be more concerned as to why they couldn't say it directly to me. HR wouldn't have made the final decision here, it seems other departments did. HR was just how someone felt it was safe to communicate that feedback, which for me is a major issue in a workplace.
  - zaksoup 6y ago
    I think there's a place for HR to help somebody give feedback about social or work-style issues. If somebody has a track record of getting defensive with face-to-face feedback it might be useful to have a manager present as a mediator and go through a formal process. That's just not the same as giving scientific feedback in the review process for research and shouldn't be in the way there.
    - that_guy_iain 6y ago
      I think you're missing the massive point that someone thought that doing it in a non-anonymous way would have resulted in retribution. That is not defensive, it's offensive. You seem to be missing the fact that the woman seems quite happy to try and bury people over seemed transgressions. Someone thought they HAD to goto HR to provide the feedback because no other way was safe. If you want to act about the scientifc review process, that should never happen and when it does there should be serious action taken.
- fooker 6y ago
  I would have routed feedback through HR if and only if I would have feared retaliation.
- fuzzylightbulb 6y ago
  What if you were the sort of person with a very public history of suing your employer? Could you understand then why they might be very formal when dealing with you, especially when needing to deliver news you'd likely not be a fan of?
  - zaksoup 6y ago
    I don't really see how that's relevant to the specific issue of scientific rigor, and in this case is a strangely one-sided issue. as Dr. Gebru pointed out, soon after she took steps towards legal action against google (I don't think a suit was actually filed) she was also given an award by Google for her work and performance. Also, it's strange to be giving google so much benefit of the doubt here. On the same day this happened the NLRB filed two formal complaints against google for retaliatory firing practices. If any participant in this drama has a known record of retaliatory and unfair labor practices, it is google, as documented by the federal government's extremely detailed complaint.
nebulous1 6y ago
> If someone says "Do X or I'll quit" when you're not going to do X, it is a resigination I mean, whether or not this stands up legally isn't worth discussing but I don't think this is typically how an ultimatum goes. Rather it's more along the lines of "this or I'll quit", "okay, we're not doing this", "right, I quit". It's not called calling your bluff for nothing. I agree that her email to the Brain group makes her position at google almost untenable, but that's a separate question. However, it might make her choose not to fight them on the resignation.
- that_guy_iain 6y ago
  > However, it might make her choose not to fight them on the resignation. How can she fight? Just curious, the US is almost completely an at will employment. Fighting to get your name dirted that you didn't resign but were fired, seems odd. Google seems to saving face for her if anything.
  - nebulous1 6y ago
    > How can she fight? Just curious, the US is almost completely an at will employment. Even with a contract? I know little enough about US labour laws, although I'm pretty sure it's not at-will all over. Where I am (not the US) you can sue for unfair dismissal. > Fighting to get your name dirted that you didn't resign but were fired, seems odd. Yeah, I agree if there's a good chance if the resignation stands. However if she could get a court to say she was unfairly dismissed it might be a different case, as it would help her case that Google have acted unfairly towards her. None of this publicity is going to help her future employment potential generally but may help in niche circles that she might be aiming for.
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    Resigning means giving up unemployment benefits or suing for unfair dismissal. Resigning sounds better than being fired when no other details are available. It's irrelevant when the parties publish their sides of the story.
sillysaurusx 6y ago
I believe she basically sent an email to fellow employees basically telling them to stop working. That alone is a firable. That is completely nuts and unacceptable work place behaviour. The fact Google didn't fire her for that should speak volumes. This is little more than gossip unless you can point to something specific that people can judge for themselves. Saying “she basically did X” is a clever way to influence how people feel about her. I’ll admit, I had negative thoughts till this thread. Now I’m not so sure. She’s definitely passionate, and one might say aggressive, but more and more people are saying that it’s extremely unusual for Google to demand a rejection for academic reasons rather than business concerns. Whether she was a good employee is kind of beside the point now.
- that_guy_iain 6y ago
  > This is little more than gossip unless you can point to something specific that people can judge for themselves. Saying “she basically did X” is a clever way to influence how people feel about her. It's gossip as in I haven't seen anyone confirm the validtiy of https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-an-ethical https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-a... but I've also not seen anyone deny it. In fact, it seems everyone is confirming it unoffically. From the blog post: > "What I want to say is stop writing your documents because it doesn’t make a difference." Is telling your fellow employees to stop working, if their job is writing those documents which I highly suspect it will be. > Whether she was a good employee is kind of beside the point now. I think it goes to show the good faith Google tried to have with someone who in my opinion was creating a hostile work envoirment.
  - sillysaurusx 6y ago
    That is totally not the same thing as telling your fellow employees to stop working. I like to think I’m a pretty reasonable fellow, but it’s hard to see that point of view. I felt similarly to you yesterday. Now I’m not so sure. It sounds like she was criticizing company process and was frustrated not being able to have any impact on what she perceived were real problems to the integrity of the process. I can empathize with that feeling, and I’ve done some embarrassing or unprofessional things when I was younger and slightly less wiser in similar situations. I dunno mate, people here are suddenly trying awfully hard to repeat their points about her personal behavior / paint her as an unprofessional loon. And that’s a pretty convenient distraction if her criticisms were true, wouldn’t you say?
bnj 6y ago
I don’t think you’re incorrect on any particular point. Just anecdotally, I don’t think a man sending a “do x or I’ll quit” email would be met with the same response. I think issues of race and gender are playing a role here, and that’s a shame, because while firing (accepting this resignation) of this researcher might make short term business sense, it seems like it does harm to Google’s long term credibility in trying to engage with reducing the barriers faced by (among others) women and people of color. It’s a shame there wasn’t a pathway to keeping the dialogue going, for example by getting in touch with her and letting her know that some things she was asking for wouldn’t work, but that you could work with her to accomplish her goals in some other way. From my privileged outside point of view, that seems like it could have been a more humane response which could have disarmed the conflict. I think opportunities to pursue options like that are de-emphasized when management are put in an all or nothing position. A missed opportunity for leadership.
- hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
  > I don’t think a man sending a “do x or I’ll quit” email would be met with the same response. Ugh, this is a bit infuriating to me. I think there are a ton of parallels in this whole situation to the James Damore memo issue, and IIRC Damore was fired pretty quickly: Google employee sends out an email to a wide distribution, and while that email may make some valid points, the overall tone of the post guarantees it to be a net negative to the company, and then when the employee is let go, they bitch and moan about how there is some sort of conspiracy in the company against them. I believe firing Damore was the right decision and I believe Google was right to accept Gebru's resignation.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
runako 6y ago
> not seen that much drama about it than one post This morning, there were front-page posts about this on the New York Times, Washington Post, Wired, Google, BBC, and Financial Times. It's being covered pretty widely.
- spoopyskelly 6y ago
  Some bad PR is worth getting rid of toxic folks that stand in the way of progress.

zaksoup 6y ago

If somebody used HR as the mechanism to communicate feedback on the scientific rigor of research I was leading I would also find that concerning and objectionable. Human Resources is not peer review.

that_guy_iain 6y ago
Honestly, if someone had to use HR to give feedback on anything, I would be more concerned as to why they couldn't say it directly to me. HR wouldn't have made the final decision here, it seems other departments did. HR was just how someone felt it was safe to communicate that feedback, which for me is a major issue in a workplace.
- zaksoup 6y ago
  I think there's a place for HR to help somebody give feedback about social or work-style issues. If somebody has a track record of getting defensive with face-to-face feedback it might be useful to have a manager present as a mediator and go through a formal process. That's just not the same as giving scientific feedback in the review process for research and shouldn't be in the way there.
  - that_guy_iain 6y ago
    I think you're missing the massive point that someone thought that doing it in a non-anonymous way would have resulted in retribution. That is not defensive, it's offensive. You seem to be missing the fact that the woman seems quite happy to try and bury people over seemed transgressions. Someone thought they HAD to goto HR to provide the feedback because no other way was safe. If you want to act about the scientifc review process, that should never happen and when it does there should be serious action taken.
fooker 6y ago
I would have routed feedback through HR if and only if I would have feared retaliation.
fuzzylightbulb 6y ago
What if you were the sort of person with a very public history of suing your employer? Could you understand then why they might be very formal when dealing with you, especially when needing to deliver news you'd likely not be a fan of?
- zaksoup 6y ago
  I don't really see how that's relevant to the specific issue of scientific rigor, and in this case is a strangely one-sided issue. as Dr. Gebru pointed out, soon after she took steps towards legal action against google (I don't think a suit was actually filed) she was also given an award by Google for her work and performance. Also, it's strange to be giving google so much benefit of the doubt here. On the same day this happened the NLRB filed two formal complaints against google for retaliatory firing practices. If any participant in this drama has a known record of retaliatory and unfair labor practices, it is google, as documented by the federal government's extremely detailed complaint.

nebulous1 6y ago

> If someone says "Do X or I'll quit" when you're not going to do X, it is a resigination I mean, whether or not this stands up legally isn't worth discussing but I don't think this is typically how an ultimatum goes. Rather it's more along the lines of "this or I'll quit", "okay, we're not doing this", "right, I quit". It's not called calling your bluff for nothing. I agree that her email to the Brain group makes her position at google almost untenable, but that's a separate question. However, it might make her choose not to fight them on the resignation.

that_guy_iain 6y ago
> However, it might make her choose not to fight them on the resignation. How can she fight? Just curious, the US is almost completely an at will employment. Fighting to get your name dirted that you didn't resign but were fired, seems odd. Google seems to saving face for her if anything.
- nebulous1 6y ago
  > How can she fight? Just curious, the US is almost completely an at will employment. Even with a contract? I know little enough about US labour laws, although I'm pretty sure it's not at-will all over. Where I am (not the US) you can sue for unfair dismissal. > Fighting to get your name dirted that you didn't resign but were fired, seems odd. Yeah, I agree if there's a good chance if the resignation stands. However if she could get a court to say she was unfairly dismissed it might be a different case, as it would help her case that Google have acted unfairly towards her. None of this publicity is going to help her future employment potential generally but may help in niche circles that she might be aiming for.
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  Resigning means giving up unemployment benefits or suing for unfair dismissal. Resigning sounds better than being fired when no other details are available. It's irrelevant when the parties publish their sides of the story.

sillysaurusx 6y ago

I believe she basically sent an email to fellow employees basically telling them to stop working. That alone is a firable. That is completely nuts and unacceptable work place behaviour. The fact Google didn't fire her for that should speak volumes. This is little more than gossip unless you can point to something specific that people can judge for themselves. Saying “she basically did X” is a clever way to influence how people feel about her. I’ll admit, I had negative thoughts till this thread. Now I’m not so sure. She’s definitely passionate, and one might say aggressive, but more and more people are saying that it’s extremely unusual for Google to demand a rejection for academic reasons rather than business concerns. Whether she was a good employee is kind of beside the point now.

that_guy_iain 6y ago
> This is little more than gossip unless you can point to something specific that people can judge for themselves. Saying “she basically did X” is a clever way to influence how people feel about her. It's gossip as in I haven't seen anyone confirm the validtiy of https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-an-ethical https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-a... but I've also not seen anyone deny it. In fact, it seems everyone is confirming it unoffically. From the blog post: > "What I want to say is stop writing your documents because it doesn’t make a difference." Is telling your fellow employees to stop working, if their job is writing those documents which I highly suspect it will be. > Whether she was a good employee is kind of beside the point now. I think it goes to show the good faith Google tried to have with someone who in my opinion was creating a hostile work envoirment.
- sillysaurusx 6y ago
  That is totally not the same thing as telling your fellow employees to stop working. I like to think I’m a pretty reasonable fellow, but it’s hard to see that point of view. I felt similarly to you yesterday. Now I’m not so sure. It sounds like she was criticizing company process and was frustrated not being able to have any impact on what she perceived were real problems to the integrity of the process. I can empathize with that feeling, and I’ve done some embarrassing or unprofessional things when I was younger and slightly less wiser in similar situations. I dunno mate, people here are suddenly trying awfully hard to repeat their points about her personal behavior / paint her as an unprofessional loon. And that’s a pretty convenient distraction if her criticisms were true, wouldn’t you say?

bnj 6y ago

I don’t think you’re incorrect on any particular point. Just anecdotally, I don’t think a man sending a “do x or I’ll quit” email would be met with the same response. I think issues of race and gender are playing a role here, and that’s a shame, because while firing (accepting this resignation) of this researcher might make short term business sense, it seems like it does harm to Google’s long term credibility in trying to engage with reducing the barriers faced by (among others) women and people of color. It’s a shame there wasn’t a pathway to keeping the dialogue going, for example by getting in touch with her and letting her know that some things she was asking for wouldn’t work, but that you could work with her to accomplish her goals in some other way. From my privileged outside point of view, that seems like it could have been a more humane response which could have disarmed the conflict. I think opportunities to pursue options like that are de-emphasized when management are put in an all or nothing position. A missed opportunity for leadership.

hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
> I don’t think a man sending a “do x or I’ll quit” email would be met with the same response. Ugh, this is a bit infuriating to me. I think there are a ton of parallels in this whole situation to the James Damore memo issue, and IIRC Damore was fired pretty quickly: Google employee sends out an email to a wide distribution, and while that email may make some valid points, the overall tone of the post guarantees it to be a net negative to the company, and then when the employee is let go, they bitch and moan about how there is some sort of conspiracy in the company against them. I believe firing Damore was the right decision and I believe Google was right to accept Gebru's resignation.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

runako 6y ago

> not seen that much drama about it than one post This morning, there were front-page posts about this on the New York Times, Washington Post, Wired, Google, BBC, and Financial Times. It's being covered pretty widely.

spoopyskelly 6y ago
Some bad PR is worth getting rid of toxic folks that stand in the way of progress.