5 ms·

Dr. Gebru was fired for having approached a lawyer about workplace issues. (She told Jeff Dean and others that she was doing so in an email made public). That

Dr. Gebru was fired for having approached a lawyer about workplace issues. (She told Jeff Dean and others that she was doing so in an email made public). That triggers Legal to retaliate and look for a reason to fire the employee, immediately. Jeff Dean let the conflict drag out 6+ months because he thought he had control of the situation (and he was wrong). Without Jeff Dean’s persistence, Dr. Gebru would probably have been retaliated upon as swiftly as those in the Alphabet Workers Union. That’s how Legal and HR work—- they retaliate if litigation looks imminent. (Levandowski lasted so long because he was dealing with not Jeff Dean but Larry Page). Google handled Dr Gebru’s exit differently than that of Anthony Levandowski, Andy Rubin, David Drummond, etc etc because Jeff Dean made the call in timing and he was really that clueless about public optics, especially with Tensorflow’s huge following. Moreover, Dr Gebru didn’t have the bankroll to fund a legal team like any of the others listed. A lot of the posts here suggest Google is struggling with scale. Dr Gebru’s case definitely would have been handled differently were Google a smaller company. Also if there wasn’t COVID—- keep in mind she was fired a couple days before Thanksgiving during COVID. The whole country was a mess then.

nfkfjgnfne 5y ago
Why are you lying? Gebru was fired because she gave an ultimatum to reveal the name of an anonymous reviewer, which Google declined.
ergocoder 5y ago
> Dr. Gebru was fired for having approached a lawyer about workplace issues. That is just very dishonest. She gave an ultimatum. Execs accepted the ultimatum. You are gaslighting other people on this topic. At the very least, you should've acknowledged that this is up to an interpretation. Regardless whether she was fired or quit, she was toxic as hell. She dragged Jeff Dean into an unrelated matter in public and implied Jeff Dean supported personal attack. https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1278569638532530177 https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1278569638532530177 -- this happened a few months before she left or was fired from google If a direct report did this to me, I would've wanted them to leave. In this case, Gebru wanted to leave (according to her ultimatum). Jeff Dean wanted her to leave (I don't doubt this. nobody wanted to work with a colleage who attacked them on twitter). I see a happy ending for both. Gebru and her supporters have been dishonest about the whole thing.
- choppaface 5y ago
  The email about the lawyers is months before the “ultimatum.” The reason Dr Gebru’s case is so divisive in tech (especially in this thread) is because so many are agnostic or ignorant of the role of ethics in tech; and almost every employee is ignorant of how Legal/HR execute retaliation. Anthony Levandowski is a literal criminal and yet is still enjoying tens of millions of dollars of Google’s money. Same with Andy Rubin. Even Michael Church is rich. If one percent of the energy spent fighting Dr Gebru was put into fighting the real scumbags in tech… you’d have something more like Google before it got greedy with scale.
  - Buge 5y ago
    Is there any reason to think Michael Church earned more than Dr. Gebru? Michael Church only worked at Google for 6 months, so I would guess none of his stock vested.
  - dilyevsky 5y ago
    Can you explain why you think dragging a low level IC who worked at the company less than year over 10 years ago and afaik never really did anyone any harm into this is appropriate?
  - ergocoder 5y ago
    What does this have to do with attack Jeff Dean personally on twitter? Please note that this was months before she left. The 3 names you mentioned have nothing to do with Jeff Dean. Handling those 3 people has nothing to do with supporting Gebru or Jeff Dean. This has nothing to do with Gebru being a toxic person.
freyir 5y ago
Did she threaten litigation before or after she posted an angry rant telling her coworkers to stop working? Before or after she demanded that the company release the name of an anonymous reviewer? Before or after she told them to schedule her last day if they didn’t meet her demands?
- choppaface 5y ago
  She said we was consulting a lawyer about discrimination in the workplace. That’s all you need to say to trigger Legal to retaliate. If you’re Anthony Levandowski bartering with Larry Page, though, Legal takes a back seat. It doesn’t even matter when Levandowski instigated a collision on the 101.

nfkfjgnfne 5y ago

Why are you lying? Gebru was fired because she gave an ultimatum to reveal the name of an anonymous reviewer, which Google declined.

ergocoder 5y ago

> Dr. Gebru was fired for having approached a lawyer about workplace issues. That is just very dishonest. She gave an ultimatum. Execs accepted the ultimatum. You are gaslighting other people on this topic. At the very least, you should've acknowledged that this is up to an interpretation. Regardless whether she was fired or quit, she was toxic as hell. She dragged Jeff Dean into an unrelated matter in public and implied Jeff Dean supported personal attack. https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1278569638532530177 https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1278569638532530177 -- this happened a few months before she left or was fired from google If a direct report did this to me, I would've wanted them to leave. In this case, Gebru wanted to leave (according to her ultimatum). Jeff Dean wanted her to leave (I don't doubt this. nobody wanted to work with a colleage who attacked them on twitter). I see a happy ending for both. Gebru and her supporters have been dishonest about the whole thing.

choppaface 5y ago
The email about the lawyers is months before the “ultimatum.” The reason Dr Gebru’s case is so divisive in tech (especially in this thread) is because so many are agnostic or ignorant of the role of ethics in tech; and almost every employee is ignorant of how Legal/HR execute retaliation. Anthony Levandowski is a literal criminal and yet is still enjoying tens of millions of dollars of Google’s money. Same with Andy Rubin. Even Michael Church is rich. If one percent of the energy spent fighting Dr Gebru was put into fighting the real scumbags in tech… you’d have something more like Google before it got greedy with scale.
- Buge 5y ago
  Is there any reason to think Michael Church earned more than Dr. Gebru? Michael Church only worked at Google for 6 months, so I would guess none of his stock vested.
- dilyevsky 5y ago
  Can you explain why you think dragging a low level IC who worked at the company less than year over 10 years ago and afaik never really did anyone any harm into this is appropriate?
- ergocoder 5y ago
  What does this have to do with attack Jeff Dean personally on twitter? Please note that this was months before she left. The 3 names you mentioned have nothing to do with Jeff Dean. Handling those 3 people has nothing to do with supporting Gebru or Jeff Dean. This has nothing to do with Gebru being a toxic person.

freyir 5y ago

Did she threaten litigation before or after she posted an angry rant telling her coworkers to stop working? Before or after she demanded that the company release the name of an anonymous reviewer? Before or after she told them to schedule her last day if they didn’t meet her demands?

choppaface 5y ago
She said we was consulting a lawyer about discrimination in the workplace. That’s all you need to say to trigger Legal to retaliate. If you’re Anthony Levandowski bartering with Larry Page, though, Legal takes a back seat. It doesn’t even matter when Levandowski instigated a collision on the 101.