3 ms·
> Firms must therefore maintain an atmosphere of “psychological safety” that encourages employees to speak up when they believe things have gone amiss. That is
by trhway 5y ago
> Firms must therefore maintain an atmosphere of “psychological safety” that encourages employees to speak up when they believe things have gone amiss. That is, firms need to ensure that their employees will call-out deviance, rather than permit its normalization.
That hollow management speak sounds pretty contrasting with that guy just recently getting 4 years for calling out the normalization of the deviance of drone killing of innocent civilians.
- sokoloff 5y agoFrom the judge in that case, with which I’m inclined to agree: “You are not being prosecuted for speaking out about the drone program killing innocent people,” said O’Grady. “You could have been a whistleblower … without taking any of these documents.” That punishment was for sharing documents classified as top secret with a journalist, not for calling out a deviation.
- trhway 5y agoi don't think orally delivering classified information instead of using electronic/paper copy magically makes it not a crime. All that while decreasing the trustworthiness of the information - ie. from journalist POV it would be dealing with hearsay instead of documented facts. >That punishment was for sharing documents classified as top secret with a journalist, not for calling out a deviation. yep, and for jaywalking. Assange was hunted down for sex crimes (which as it happens he didn't commit) not for publishing the docs. And Navalny in Russia is doing time for business crimes not for being PITA for Putin.
- TeMPOraL 5y agoAnd Al Capone got imprisoned for tax evasion. This is a tried and true method of governments. If you piss them badly enough, they'll move Heaven and Earth to find something they can legally get you for. (That is, as long as they care about being seen following their own rules. If they don't, then all bets are off.)
- watwut 5y agoSomehow, I don't think Al Capone analogy works for me here.
- watwut 5y agoHe could have just speak and nobody would believe him. Without taking documents, he would be super easy to dismiss. Which is the whole point of course. Make it sound like there was legal meaningful action open for him while protecting the acts he made public.
- kodah 5y agoThat is a possibility, but certainly not definitive. The fact is that he did choose that his odds were better this way, and he accepted the consequences of his actions.