29 ms·

> “Due to retaliation, a hostile environment, and illegal actions by the company, I cannot continue to work at Google and have no choice but to leave the compan

> “Due to retaliation, a hostile environment, and illegal actions by the company, I cannot continue to work at Google and have no choice but to leave the company at the end of this week,” Ariel Koren said in a statement posted Tuesday to Medium. Many people is missing the point. "Retaliation" is illegal. > Google denied retaliation and the National Labor Relations Board found no wrongdoing after an investigation In my experience this kind of investigation have very high standards on what is considered "retaliation" as it is very difficult to prove that negating promotions, or moving people to new positions is directly related to "retaliation". Maybe it was just a misunderstanding by the employee, but I would like to see more realistic investigations that take into account the timing of the companies actions.

EdwardDiego 4y ago
Boycotting Israel gets your company in trouble with various state governments in the US, like no supplying services to the government, and in Arkansas, it gets even more viral in that people you supply services to are forbidden from supplying services to the government. My RH contract specifically forbade boycotting Israel, I'm sure for those reasons. And of course, I imagine that Israel has laws about doing business there that look dimly on being boycotted. It's very very dumb legislation, and I think derives from a very odd facet of belief found in some American Protestant belief systems - that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- georgia_peach 4y ago
  - dang 4y ago
    You can't do this kind of flamewar here, obviously*, and we've warned you before, so I've banned the account. * https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - andy_ppp 4y ago
    - georgia_peach 4y ago
      - andy_ppp 4y ago
        smcl 4y ago
        The commenter is being a bit inarticulate, I don’t know their intentions and can't speak to their beliefs. But they’re not pushing conspiracy theories, they’re quoting an Israeli newspaper who reported how contributions to US political parties broke down by faith (supposedly 50% of Dem and 25% of GOP coming from Jewish people). I'd take this with a pinch of salt, personally, as I find it hard to believe you can accurately tie a religion or ethnicity to a quantity of dollars donated. But you’ve then overreacted and claimed they are saying Jewish people are behind everything which just isn’t what they said, even if you think it’s what they believe. What’s clear is the USA is for whatever reason very involved in tipping the balance in Israel, and it’s hurting everyone in the region to some degree - regardless of their religion or ethnicity.
    - ssizn 4y ago
      You are trying to shut down discourse with the same age-old excuse.
- dustincoates 4y ago
  I grew up in an Evangelical church and I attend a Protestant church now (although not American) and the only place I've ever heard people claim that my fellow congregants believe that about Israel is online from people outside the church. I'm sure you'll be able to find _someone_ who believes it, but it is so weird to see people claiming something as a fact about your church that you've never encountered in nearly 40 years. What's infinitely more likely is that Christians feel a certain affinity towards Israel due to a shared Judeo-Christian heritage.
  - shakna 4y ago
    Whilst I've definitely got the impression, that _most_ people think of it as a shared heritage, I have now and then had a few people quoting the same prophecy from Zechariah as their reasoning. > And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it - Zechariah 12:3 The (mis-)interpretation being that for the return of God to occur, the existence of Jerusalem is a pre-requisite. It can't disappear, again. So for that to happen, we should protect Israel, who will protect the city. We should especially protect them because the world will gather against them. The logic has some major flaws to it, and can be easily worked around, but I've heard it a few times.
    - jmorse2 4y ago
      Possibly closer to the mark in terms of scripture is Ezekiel 38, which specifies that the Jews are to have returned/gathered from exile/dispersion and be living in peace ("unwalled cities") before an invasion/looting from the north. Of course, it only specifies the movement of peoples, not the political configuration of the land.
      - shakna 4y ago
        The same groups of people tend to apply that one to the Yom Kippur war, and treat it as already fulfilled. The thing about Jerusalem having to remain as a heavy stone is more what inspires them to defend it.
- hourago 4y ago
  > Boycotting Israel There are legal ways of firing an employee if the employee does something illegal. Bullying is not one of them. And that is my point, people insists that "Google has reasons" that does not justify to commit a crime.
- smitty1e 4y ago
  > odd facet of belief found in some American Protestant belief systems - that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist. Nothing 'odd' here, if one subscribes to the notion that Revelation (the last book of the Bible) is predictive. The idea was popularized in the 1970s by Hal Lindsey[1] whose 'The Late Great Planet Earth'[2] is amusuingly not for sale ate [1]. I guess that Lindsey was a better book peddler than prophet. [1] https://www.hallindsey.com/ https://www.hallindsey.com/ [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Late_Great_Planet_Earth https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Late_Great_Planet_Earth
- yodsanklai 4y ago
  > It's very very dumb legislation, and I think derives from a very odd facet of belief found in some American Protestant belief systems - that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist. I remember reading Bill Clinton's biography. At some point, he mentioned that a pastor told him something along these lines, and that it was an important realisation for him. (I read that years ago, could be slightly wrong but that was the idea). I found that extremely disturbing that archaic religious beliefs would influence foreign policies. That being said, it's well known that our former French president got advised by an astrologer [1] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jun/25/jonhenley.theobserver2 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jun/25/jonhenley.theo...
  - rayiner 4y ago
    > I found that extremely disturbing that archaic religious beliefs would influence foreign policies Why? As a former atheist, I’ve come to the realization that the alternative—at least at scale—to traditional religion isn’t people being hyper rational engineers. It’s different and less well established unprovable and illogical beliefs. Have you read some of the social “science” stuff that gets published? All the “woo” stuff? People believe that stuff and it gets executed into policy. (The reasons for the atheism being former are unrelated to that observation, my point is just that I get where your initial take is coming from.)
    - wahnfrieden 4y ago
    - boardwaalk 4y ago
      The belief that more rational beliefs are possible is not exactly debatable, is it? Certainly, the “woo” stuff you referenced is not the only alternative? That people have to believe in some “religion” and that common “religions” at the current point in history are at peak possible rationality… well, there’s no real reason to believe that, is there?
      - imchillyb 4y ago
- kurupt213 4y ago
  Israel deserves to exist as much as any other country
  - sofixa 4y ago
    It absolutely does. It doesn't deserve to deny the existence of another country, Palestine, though.
    - golergka 4y ago
      Good thing that it doesn't. Palestine became a country with thanks to Israel and Oslo Accords for the first time in history.
      - npc54321 4y ago
        Cant they just stop killing each other? I dont believe in made up books saying "this is your promised land" I also dont believe in madeup books saying ",kill jews" Just stop landgrabbing and/or killing each other jeez. Defending Israel is such an NPC mentality, theres no good guys in that war they both commit atrocities.
        kurupt213 4y ago
        That’s a big ask. How disproportionate do you think the US response would be to people launching rockets into our country? My guess is that we would kill the majority of them. I don’t think it’s fair to ask Israel to sit on their hands while they are attacked.
        sofixa 4y ago
        If Native Americans being put into reservations against their will, being evicted from their homes, being treated as second class people, were launching rockets at US civilians, the US would retaliate, sure. But both parties would be in the wrong, same as Israel/Palestine.
- alldayeveryday 4y ago
  > It's very very dumb legislation, and I think derives from a very odd facet of belief found in some American Protestant belief systems - that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist. Protestants and the Israeli lobby have always had a very symbiotic relationship.
- fredgrott 4y ago
  Orthodox Jew would disagree with you considering that there has been a civil war between mandatory IDF service and the orthodox Jews in Israel stating that religion and Zionism are opposites and not the same.
- imchillyb 4y ago
  Israel exists because Israel as a nation state is a tiny ally-island in a sea of enemy-aggressors. Why do you think so many politicians, that claim atheism, are still in favor of our alliance with Israel? We need them there.
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    This claim is always so baffling to me. The strong relationship with Israel has only hurt the US. In fact the best choice regarding Israel that the US has ever made is telling the Israeli and the British to stop being colonialist asshats in 1954. The Israel relationship is the source of far more problems then it solves anything for the US in the middle east. > sea of enemy-aggressors. The amount of Israeli invasion of the nations around it, plus the constant bombing and invading of their airspace plus the constant assassinations and support for rebellions in those countries would question who the aggressor is. Not to mention the constant and systematic reduction in the land that based on earlier agreements should belong to Palestinians.
- nebula8804 4y ago
  Its unconstitutional and needs to be challenged on a state by state level. In Georgia the state was sued because Abby Martin (a famous critic of Israel) was barred from speaking at a University unless she signed a pledge not to boycott. The state lost but basically changed the law to raise the monetary amount that would trigger the requirement. All these BS laws were pushed quietly by local groups and now it is a uphill battle to challenge them and get them removed. I wish your organization would challenge the law instead of just letting this wrong continue to erode what little freedoms we have left. Same thing is happening in the culture wars. The nutjobs are slowly getting elected onto school boards and other local positions so they can start adding prayer/ban civil rights related content/remove any references to CRT.
- mberg0 4y ago
- foogazi 4y ago
  > that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist. Imagine thinking that humanity has the power to influence the actions of G_d Oooh, then you’d see the actions of the opposition as influenced by the devil A cycle of hate, mind-blown
manholio 4y ago
Yup, I can see no sign of retaliation: "she would be transferred to Sao Paolo, Brazil". I mean, who isn't ready to upend their lives, leave all their friends and family to move into a poorer country on another continent for the sake of their employer? There is only one name for that: "huge opportunity", thank you lots Google for not being evil.
- blisterpeanuts 4y ago
  Did it say she has to physically relocate, or can she work remote and just visit there 2-3 times a year?
  - hourago 4y ago
    What would hurt most the employee? That is the choice when you are bullying someone.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
throwaway75 4y ago
Is "activism" against the employer protected under anti-retaliation laws? I thought these laws protected employees for things like reporting workplace discrimination, harassment, being a witness in such an investigation, etc. Can you indulge in activism against your employer and claim that you need to be protected from retaliation if they fire you?
- sigzero 4y ago
  No. That would be absurd in my opinion.
bww 4y ago
It's worth pointing out that retaliation, itself, is not illegal or even necessarily morally dubious. If a company were to retaliate against an employee for stealing by firing them no reasonable person would find fault with that. Only retaliation for a protected activity is illegal. Is interfering with or undermining the company's business prospects in service of a political opinion a protected activity? I don't know, but it would not surprise me if it were not. To be entirely honest, I'm not sure I think it should be. I can certainly imagine a lot of scenarios where I would not approve of people motivated by certain political opinions actively working against the interests of the company that employed me.
- LtWorf 4y ago
  Should you choose between holding a political view or having a job?
  - Youden 4y ago
    Not making any judgements on right or wrong but having a political view and expressing/promoting/pushing it at work are different things.
  - compsciphd 4y ago
    Such as Brendan Eich being forced out (retaliated against?) for views that were not expressed within the business only outside of it?
paxys 4y ago
Legally speaking, "retaliation" can only occur if your employer treats you less favorably after you report discriminatory practices. The company is allowed to treat you less favorably or even fire you for any other (non-protected) reason, including your general opinions. In this case, protesting a deal with Israel is an opinion not a protected action, so there's really no question of retaliation. If I disagree (whether publicly or privately) with my company's product strategy or who they choose to do business with, they are absolutely allowed to fire me.
Aunche 4y ago
If you read her account on Medium, it's clear that she wasn't retaliated against. Google sided with her and determined her manager to be wrong for relocating her, so the subtext is that she manages to keep her position. However, she still considers it retaliation because Google didn't determine it to be retaliation. If I were Google I'd fire her for abusing disability leave. She clearly was fit enough to keep up with and protest Google's development in Israel and appear on TV. Meanwhile, she didn't make a single effort to keep up with her team. https://medium.com/@arielkoren/googles-complicity-in-israeli-apartheid-how-google-weaponizes-diversity-to-silence-palestinians-cb41b24ac423 https://medium.com/@arielkoren/googles-complicity-in-israeli...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nradov 4y ago
That's irrelevant. Even if a company did punish an employee for protesting a contract with Israel, that wouldn't legally be considered "retaliation" under US federal law. The timing doesn't matter.

EdwardDiego 4y ago

Boycotting Israel gets your company in trouble with various state governments in the US, like no supplying services to the government, and in Arkansas, it gets even more viral in that people you supply services to are forbidden from supplying services to the government. My RH contract specifically forbade boycotting Israel, I'm sure for those reasons. And of course, I imagine that Israel has laws about doing business there that look dimly on being boycotted. It's very very dumb legislation, and I think derives from a very odd facet of belief found in some American Protestant belief systems - that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
georgia_peach 4y ago
- dang 4y ago
  You can't do this kind of flamewar here, obviously*, and we've warned you before, so I've banned the account. * https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- andy_ppp 4y ago
  - georgia_peach 4y ago
    - andy_ppp 4y ago
      - smcl 4y ago
        The commenter is being a bit inarticulate, I don’t know their intentions and can't speak to their beliefs. But they’re not pushing conspiracy theories, they’re quoting an Israeli newspaper who reported how contributions to US political parties broke down by faith (supposedly 50% of Dem and 25% of GOP coming from Jewish people). I'd take this with a pinch of salt, personally, as I find it hard to believe you can accurately tie a religion or ethnicity to a quantity of dollars donated. But you’ve then overreacted and claimed they are saying Jewish people are behind everything which just isn’t what they said, even if you think it’s what they believe. What’s clear is the USA is for whatever reason very involved in tipping the balance in Israel, and it’s hurting everyone in the region to some degree - regardless of their religion or ethnicity.
  - ssizn 4y ago
    You are trying to shut down discourse with the same age-old excuse.
dustincoates 4y ago
I grew up in an Evangelical church and I attend a Protestant church now (although not American) and the only place I've ever heard people claim that my fellow congregants believe that about Israel is online from people outside the church. I'm sure you'll be able to find _someone_ who believes it, but it is so weird to see people claiming something as a fact about your church that you've never encountered in nearly 40 years. What's infinitely more likely is that Christians feel a certain affinity towards Israel due to a shared Judeo-Christian heritage.
- shakna 4y ago
  Whilst I've definitely got the impression, that _most_ people think of it as a shared heritage, I have now and then had a few people quoting the same prophecy from Zechariah as their reasoning. > And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it - Zechariah 12:3 The (mis-)interpretation being that for the return of God to occur, the existence of Jerusalem is a pre-requisite. It can't disappear, again. So for that to happen, we should protect Israel, who will protect the city. We should especially protect them because the world will gather against them. The logic has some major flaws to it, and can be easily worked around, but I've heard it a few times.
  - jmorse2 4y ago
    Possibly closer to the mark in terms of scripture is Ezekiel 38, which specifies that the Jews are to have returned/gathered from exile/dispersion and be living in peace ("unwalled cities") before an invasion/looting from the north. Of course, it only specifies the movement of peoples, not the political configuration of the land.
    - shakna 4y ago
      The same groups of people tend to apply that one to the Yom Kippur war, and treat it as already fulfilled. The thing about Jerusalem having to remain as a heavy stone is more what inspires them to defend it.
hourago 4y ago
> Boycotting Israel There are legal ways of firing an employee if the employee does something illegal. Bullying is not one of them. And that is my point, people insists that "Google has reasons" that does not justify to commit a crime.
smitty1e 4y ago
> odd facet of belief found in some American Protestant belief systems - that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist. Nothing 'odd' here, if one subscribes to the notion that Revelation (the last book of the Bible) is predictive. The idea was popularized in the 1970s by Hal Lindsey[1] whose 'The Late Great Planet Earth'[2] is amusuingly not for sale ate [1]. I guess that Lindsey was a better book peddler than prophet. [1] https://www.hallindsey.com/ https://www.hallindsey.com/ [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Late_Great_Planet_Earth https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Late_Great_Planet_Earth
yodsanklai 4y ago
> It's very very dumb legislation, and I think derives from a very odd facet of belief found in some American Protestant belief systems - that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist. I remember reading Bill Clinton's biography. At some point, he mentioned that a pastor told him something along these lines, and that it was an important realisation for him. (I read that years ago, could be slightly wrong but that was the idea). I found that extremely disturbing that archaic religious beliefs would influence foreign policies. That being said, it's well known that our former French president got advised by an astrologer [1] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jun/25/jonhenley.theobserver2 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jun/25/jonhenley.theo...
- rayiner 4y ago
  > I found that extremely disturbing that archaic religious beliefs would influence foreign policies Why? As a former atheist, I’ve come to the realization that the alternative—at least at scale—to traditional religion isn’t people being hyper rational engineers. It’s different and less well established unprovable and illogical beliefs. Have you read some of the social “science” stuff that gets published? All the “woo” stuff? People believe that stuff and it gets executed into policy. (The reasons for the atheism being former are unrelated to that observation, my point is just that I get where your initial take is coming from.)
  - wahnfrieden 4y ago
  - boardwaalk 4y ago
    The belief that more rational beliefs are possible is not exactly debatable, is it? Certainly, the “woo” stuff you referenced is not the only alternative? That people have to believe in some “religion” and that common “religions” at the current point in history are at peak possible rationality… well, there’s no real reason to believe that, is there?
    - imchillyb 4y ago
kurupt213 4y ago
Israel deserves to exist as much as any other country
- sofixa 4y ago
  It absolutely does. It doesn't deserve to deny the existence of another country, Palestine, though.
  - golergka 4y ago
    Good thing that it doesn't. Palestine became a country with thanks to Israel and Oslo Accords for the first time in history.
    - npc54321 4y ago
      Cant they just stop killing each other? I dont believe in made up books saying "this is your promised land" I also dont believe in madeup books saying ",kill jews" Just stop landgrabbing and/or killing each other jeez. Defending Israel is such an NPC mentality, theres no good guys in that war they both commit atrocities.
      - kurupt213 4y ago
        That’s a big ask. How disproportionate do you think the US response would be to people launching rockets into our country? My guess is that we would kill the majority of them. I don’t think it’s fair to ask Israel to sit on their hands while they are attacked.
        sofixa 4y ago
        If Native Americans being put into reservations against their will, being evicted from their homes, being treated as second class people, were launching rockets at US civilians, the US would retaliate, sure. But both parties would be in the wrong, same as Israel/Palestine.
alldayeveryday 4y ago
> It's very very dumb legislation, and I think derives from a very odd facet of belief found in some American Protestant belief systems - that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist. Protestants and the Israeli lobby have always had a very symbiotic relationship.
fredgrott 4y ago
Orthodox Jew would disagree with you considering that there has been a civil war between mandatory IDF service and the orthodox Jews in Israel stating that religion and Zionism are opposites and not the same.
imchillyb 4y ago
Israel exists because Israel as a nation state is a tiny ally-island in a sea of enemy-aggressors. Why do you think so many politicians, that claim atheism, are still in favor of our alliance with Israel? We need them there.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  This claim is always so baffling to me. The strong relationship with Israel has only hurt the US. In fact the best choice regarding Israel that the US has ever made is telling the Israeli and the British to stop being colonialist asshats in 1954. The Israel relationship is the source of far more problems then it solves anything for the US in the middle east. > sea of enemy-aggressors. The amount of Israeli invasion of the nations around it, plus the constant bombing and invading of their airspace plus the constant assassinations and support for rebellions in those countries would question who the aggressor is. Not to mention the constant and systematic reduction in the land that based on earlier agreements should belong to Palestinians.
nebula8804 4y ago
Its unconstitutional and needs to be challenged on a state by state level. In Georgia the state was sued because Abby Martin (a famous critic of Israel) was barred from speaking at a University unless she signed a pledge not to boycott. The state lost but basically changed the law to raise the monetary amount that would trigger the requirement. All these BS laws were pushed quietly by local groups and now it is a uphill battle to challenge them and get them removed. I wish your organization would challenge the law instead of just letting this wrong continue to erode what little freedoms we have left. Same thing is happening in the culture wars. The nutjobs are slowly getting elected onto school boards and other local positions so they can start adding prayer/ban civil rights related content/remove any references to CRT.
mberg0 4y ago
foogazi 4y ago
> that for Jesus to come back, the State of Israel has to exist. Imagine thinking that humanity has the power to influence the actions of G_d Oooh, then you’d see the actions of the opposition as influenced by the devil A cycle of hate, mind-blown

manholio 4y ago

Yup, I can see no sign of retaliation: "she would be transferred to Sao Paolo, Brazil". I mean, who isn't ready to upend their lives, leave all their friends and family to move into a poorer country on another continent for the sake of their employer? There is only one name for that: "huge opportunity", thank you lots Google for not being evil.

blisterpeanuts 4y ago
Did it say she has to physically relocate, or can she work remote and just visit there 2-3 times a year?
- hourago 4y ago
  What would hurt most the employee? That is the choice when you are bullying someone.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

throwaway75 4y ago

Is "activism" against the employer protected under anti-retaliation laws? I thought these laws protected employees for things like reporting workplace discrimination, harassment, being a witness in such an investigation, etc. Can you indulge in activism against your employer and claim that you need to be protected from retaliation if they fire you?

sigzero 4y ago
No. That would be absurd in my opinion.

bww 4y ago

It's worth pointing out that retaliation, itself, is not illegal or even necessarily morally dubious. If a company were to retaliate against an employee for stealing by firing them no reasonable person would find fault with that. Only retaliation for a protected activity is illegal. Is interfering with or undermining the company's business prospects in service of a political opinion a protected activity? I don't know, but it would not surprise me if it were not. To be entirely honest, I'm not sure I think it should be. I can certainly imagine a lot of scenarios where I would not approve of people motivated by certain political opinions actively working against the interests of the company that employed me.

LtWorf 4y ago
Should you choose between holding a political view or having a job?
- Youden 4y ago
  Not making any judgements on right or wrong but having a political view and expressing/promoting/pushing it at work are different things.
- compsciphd 4y ago
  Such as Brendan Eich being forced out (retaliated against?) for views that were not expressed within the business only outside of it?

paxys 4y ago

Legally speaking, "retaliation" can only occur if your employer treats you less favorably after you report discriminatory practices. The company is allowed to treat you less favorably or even fire you for any other (non-protected) reason, including your general opinions. In this case, protesting a deal with Israel is an opinion not a protected action, so there's really no question of retaliation. If I disagree (whether publicly or privately) with my company's product strategy or who they choose to do business with, they are absolutely allowed to fire me.

Aunche 4y ago

If you read her account on Medium, it's clear that she wasn't retaliated against. Google sided with her and determined her manager to be wrong for relocating her, so the subtext is that she manages to keep her position. However, she still considers it retaliation because Google didn't determine it to be retaliation. If I were Google I'd fire her for abusing disability leave. She clearly was fit enough to keep up with and protest Google's development in Israel and appear on TV. Meanwhile, she didn't make a single effort to keep up with her team. https://medium.com/@arielkoren/googles-complicity-in-israeli-apartheid-how-google-weaponizes-diversity-to-silence-palestinians-cb41b24ac423 https://medium.com/@arielkoren/googles-complicity-in-israeli...

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

nradov 4y ago

That's irrelevant. Even if a company did punish an employee for protesting a contract with Israel, that wouldn't legally be considered "retaliation" under US federal law. The timing doesn't matter.