5 ms·

What is your message -- the author shouldn't share their story of a toxic workplace because they made more money than folks in other toxic workplaces?

teakettle42 4y ago
I see an emotionally unstable author more than I see a toxic workplace.
- kibwen 4y ago
  It is prudent to err the side of giving the benefit of the doubt to the entity with relatively less power. I see no reason to instinctively jump to Google's defense here, they are more than capable of defending themselves.
- didibus 4y ago
  The whole team left, so it doesn't seem like the author was a snowflake in this case.
  - SquareWheel 4y ago
    Though looking at the timelines, the team left or had been moved around after a two year period. So it wasn't necessarily an abrupt change.
question_away 4y ago
If OP's description is what constitutes a "toxic workplace" then any service job/Amazon warehouse/construction job is also toxic. From what I read, I would describe OP's team as severely dysfunctional and the bar for "toxic" should be higher (generally, indicating some level of malice). I think it's damaging to dilute terms like "toxic" by using them to describe a situation that is generally stressful and widely experienced.
- kibwen 4y ago
  Just because something is widely experienced doesn't mean we must dismiss criticisms of it.
  - question_away 4y ago
    No, but if we're lowering the bar for what constitutes "toxic" to something that is widely experienced then that is inherently dismissive of actually toxic work environments that are not widely experienced.
    - joepie91_ 4y ago
      Toxic work environments are widespread. Their widespread nature doesn't somehow magically make them not qualify as 'toxic'. And if anything, it should prompt wider changes in industry, because clearly it is not an isolated incident.
- eropple 4y ago
  > If OP's description is what constitutes a "toxic workplace" then any service job/Amazon warehouse/construction job is also toxic. > I think it's damaging to dilute terms like "toxic" by using them to describe a situation that is generally stressful and widely experienced. This characterization is inches away from an epiphany.
  - question_away 4y ago
    I think every nihilist has the "epiphany" you're implying. My point is that any service job/Amazon warehouse/construction job is generally stressful, has unproductive meetings, and callous bosses but this is not my bar for "toxic". I'd raise that a bit higher to apply to Activision, Goldman, etc. where there's a level of malice.
    - eropple 4y ago
      What you are suggesting is "nihilism" would, by people who have not decided to norm bad things, perhaps look a lot more like communalism.
1minusp 4y ago
Share, yes absolutely. But also, keep in perspective, that these are ~$500K+ jobs and the (certainly smart) folks in these jobs can also move to other parts of google that arent as hard to deal with. So, it is understandable that others might not consider this to be a bad deal overall.

teakettle42 4y ago

I see an emotionally unstable author more than I see a toxic workplace.

kibwen 4y ago
It is prudent to err the side of giving the benefit of the doubt to the entity with relatively less power. I see no reason to instinctively jump to Google's defense here, they are more than capable of defending themselves.
didibus 4y ago
The whole team left, so it doesn't seem like the author was a snowflake in this case.
- SquareWheel 4y ago
  Though looking at the timelines, the team left or had been moved around after a two year period. So it wasn't necessarily an abrupt change.

question_away 4y ago

If OP's description is what constitutes a "toxic workplace" then any service job/Amazon warehouse/construction job is also toxic. From what I read, I would describe OP's team as severely dysfunctional and the bar for "toxic" should be higher (generally, indicating some level of malice). I think it's damaging to dilute terms like "toxic" by using them to describe a situation that is generally stressful and widely experienced.

kibwen 4y ago
Just because something is widely experienced doesn't mean we must dismiss criticisms of it.
- question_away 4y ago
  No, but if we're lowering the bar for what constitutes "toxic" to something that is widely experienced then that is inherently dismissive of actually toxic work environments that are not widely experienced.
  - joepie91_ 4y ago
    Toxic work environments are widespread. Their widespread nature doesn't somehow magically make them not qualify as 'toxic'. And if anything, it should prompt wider changes in industry, because clearly it is not an isolated incident.
eropple 4y ago
> If OP's description is what constitutes a "toxic workplace" then any service job/Amazon warehouse/construction job is also toxic. > I think it's damaging to dilute terms like "toxic" by using them to describe a situation that is generally stressful and widely experienced. This characterization is inches away from an epiphany.
- question_away 4y ago
  I think every nihilist has the "epiphany" you're implying. My point is that any service job/Amazon warehouse/construction job is generally stressful, has unproductive meetings, and callous bosses but this is not my bar for "toxic". I'd raise that a bit higher to apply to Activision, Goldman, etc. where there's a level of malice.
  - eropple 4y ago
    What you are suggesting is "nihilism" would, by people who have not decided to norm bad things, perhaps look a lot more like communalism.

1minusp 4y ago

Share, yes absolutely. But also, keep in perspective, that these are ~$500K+ jobs and the (certainly smart) folks in these jobs can also move to other parts of google that arent as hard to deal with. So, it is understandable that others might not consider this to be a bad deal overall.