4 ms·

Lately it seems that more and more rank-and-file employees believe that a company has some sort of moral obligation to take their political opinions into consid

• wootland 3y ago
  I don't think he's expecting anything, just protesting and drawing awareness. It worked too because we're now talking about it.
  • lordfrito 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • reanimus 3y ago
      And yet here we are. :)
• surfpel 3y ago
  > If you don't like the job, leave it. Meanwhile in your bio: "I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" So which is it? Defend those who speak up or demand they leave and berate them as "conceited/pretentious"?
  • xboxnolifes 3y ago
    The right applies to government involvement, not social.
    • surfpel 3y ago
      Check again, nobody said anything about the American Bill of Rights here. And the natural right is meaningless if your life is destroyed one way or another. That's "Cancel Culture".
  • lordfrito 3y ago
    I replied above to same essential comment.... you can say what you want, but in my house I'm free to kick you out if I don't like it. Go scream it from the sidewalk.
• PheonixPharts 3y ago
  This same logic can be used to justify any system of exploitive power. Companies control my ability to eat and be housed, these companies drive global politics. If the voice and ethics of the people are not allowed to influence these, then what voice to do the people have? Is my choice is to keep in line or starve how is that any different than any other despotic system? You're own profile says "I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." but clearly this only applies for the 8 hours of the day I am not at work (less if I work late)?
  • lordfrito 3y ago
    I never suggested the employee wasn't allowed to speak their mind. I'm just saying that the person should fully expect to be fired for that sort of behavior, and take that into consideration. There is a time and place, and work is not it. Don't crap where you eat, etc. If you did that in my house, I'd (politely) kick you out. You're welcome to disagree with me, but if you're inside my house then it's on my terms.
    • PheonixPharts 3y ago
      If you earnestly believe there's no important distinction between employees of a multinational corporation and a guest in your private home then I don't think there's any more possible room for discussion. I am curious though, in what specific context would you "defend to the death" my right to free speech? It seems strange to be willing to offer your life for something with so many terms and conditions applied.
      • surfpel 3y ago
        I was going to respond the same thing but it’s really pointless. What would it even mean to say that one doesn’t have the right to free speech, if having the right was indefensible after having spoken? “You have the right to bear arms but I have the right to persecute you for bearing arms”?? “You have the right to remain silent but I have the right to jail you for remaining silent”?? “Rights” in this case seem to be conflated with the technical capacity to exist as a human being and nothing beyond that. It’s just virtue signaling without substance.
• LordDragonfang 3y ago
  While it's absolutely true that corporations are amoral dictatorships, not democracies, companies like Google spend an awful lot of PR time and money virtue signaling otherwise (and I use that term not in a derogatory way, but a literal way - they are deliberately signaling virtue, often in conflict with their actual actions.) If Google want to pretend their founding principal is "do the right thing", and put that front and center in their employee handbook - well, I'd say they have limited ability to complain when employees act on that, at least without being exposed for hypocrisy. Google can't have its cake and eat it too.
  • lordfrito 3y ago
    > companies like Google spend an awful lot of PR time and money virtue signaling otherwise Oh I totally agree, I have zero love for Google or FAANG etc... they need to get reigned in. It's just that, on this particular point (tolerating disruptive workplace behavior), I'm on the side of Google (and every other company) here.
    • disqard 3y ago
      On a tangent, I find it a funny coincidence that both your handles start with "lord" -- it's like watching a debate in the House of Lords (UK's "Upper Parliament") :)
• 3np 3y ago
  “I refuse to build technology that powers genocide.” is not a political consideration, it's an ethical one. The notion that the employer should take ethical concerns into consideration is not a recent trend. Though perhaps the politiciation of it is.
  • lordfrito 3y ago
    I think there's enough popular disagreement on the issue at hand (Israel's response to Oct 7 attack) to say that for sure this issue is for sure a political one. You can't just handwave "ethics" from your high-horse and expect all the people that disagree with you to backdown. There is a wide disagreement as to who is at fault and what is to be done here. Stakes are high, people are dying. Resolving that is pretty much the exclusive realm of politics, and (when that fails) warfare.
• archagon 3y ago
  If enough employees want it to be so, a company can certainly be coerced into becoming more democratic.
  • lordfrito 3y ago
    Coerced is the operative word here. Employers don't have to accommodate your political beliefs (outside of what the law requires). If you and your friends have enough power, you can try and wield it. Buy shares and get your voice heard at the stockholders meeting. Your mileage may vary. Not everyone has the coercive power of say, Elon Musk. This person sacrificed their job to draw attention to their pet issue. What did they expect to happen? Google was going to stop the event and sit down with the employee and negotiate? Google has a disruptive employee, that is costing them more money than they are making them, and so got rid of them. No ones rights were violated.
    • archagon 3y ago
      I don't have an opinion on this particular incident, but if I work at a company that suddenly starts making military tech, and I find a critical mass of coworkers to unionize with me and protest the decision, then the company will have little choice but to back down.
      • lordfrito 3y ago
        Sure... but that's not what happened here. This employee single handedly took matters into their own hands and disrupted a company event.
        • lern_too_spel 3y ago
          It wasn't a company event, at least not an event of the company he worked for. It was a talk by someone from his company at a conference promoting Israeli tech companies.
    • boredpeter 3y ago
      [dead]
• wmidwestranger 3y ago
  I can't tell if people are desperate or delusional. > Expecting a company to kowtow to your belief system betrays a conceited/pretentious view of the world around you. I agree and I would call that delusional. On the desparate side, the trust in government and faith in the democratic system are in shambles. I'm not even sure a frustrated Google Engineer can see the bottom of the despair issue. People do not believe their local, state, or federal governments can do a anything, particularly for the common good. Take my hometown, of ~20K, that once had a fully functioning clinic and hospital. About ten years ago, the hospital was rebuilt, much nicer building but only 2 ER rooms and no critical long-term care. I suggested to my brother the town ought to have made approval of the construction dependent on providing essential services. He is smart but that idea didn't even register as a legitimate political concern. He doesn't think the government can do anything, least of all for the public good. That sentiment is building and it's a vicious, reinforcing cycle. I dearly hope something will change before there is only the faintest hope of change.
  • lordfrito 3y ago
    > On the desparate side, the trust in government and faith in the democratic system are in shambles. I'm not even sure a frustrated Google Engineer can see the bottom of the despair issue. People do not believe their local, state, or federal governments can do a anything, particularly for the common good. I get it... the angst is real... things are wrong and feel like they are spiraling... systems are failing us, we no longer trust each other, or that there is a common good. Because people can't put their finger on what's causing it, they lash out in unpredictable ways, like this. This widespread disaffection will likely get much worse before it gets better. That said -- I still believe in free speech and rule of law. No government stopped this employee from speaking their mind -- and they weren't jailed -- this is a good thing. And Google, a company owned by citizens, whose event was disrupted -- should be free to fire disruptive employees. The fact they did so is also a good thing. What I'm saying is that what happened here isn't the problem -- but to your point it is a symptom of something wider that is going on. A malaise/cancer that seems to have taken over and is rapidly metastasizing.
• salawat 3y ago
  Expecting employees to enable you to do what they aren't okay with having supported and be silent is just as entitled a worldview. Employees are not to Management/Executives as a child is to a parent. We're all adults. We're all here together, and literally the only thing the Exec title carries with it is potential liabiliy. Don't like not having your every whim kowtow'd to by people below you? Well, feel free to fire and incur the increased uninsurance premiums that will detract from your bottom line. And hey, there's other places to hire people in. But oh wait.... Everywhere else still recognizes the legotimacy of secondary strikes. Let me know how that works for ya. Or... You know, listen to the people actually doing the hard work. Be a pity if something unfortunate were to happen to that all those cooperative people that make you making money possible.
• bjourne 3y ago
  > Lately it seems that more and more rank-and-file employees believe that a company has some sort of moral obligation to take their political opinions into consideration. Flip the argument around. Rank-and-file employees believe they have the right to not shut the fuck up about issues that concern them. Emigrate to a more authoritarian country if you don't like it.
• mrtksn 3y ago
  Companies are bunch of people who come together to do something with their time and resources, you can check the documents that bring the companies into existence. When Nestle tries to hook babies to a baby formula in order to exploit their parents for profit, that's not Nestle doing it - it's the workers at Nestle doing it. The legal ecosystem might or might not hold these people responsible depending on the jurisdiction but that doesn't change who is actually choosing to do it or not. It is also nothing wrong with attempting to influence the actions of these people and its also normal to get fired for this. Even if you fail to influence those people, in retrospect you elevate the chances for these people to be deeply ashamed of and insulated from the society because of their choices. You can at least deny them the privilege of going around, giving speeches and get applause at the age when they have all the money they need and crave for the recognition for their achievements, love of people and want to believe that their lives were not waisted. Even if you can't take away their penthouses, you can make them cry in these penthouses. It is a good practice to shame people because it is one of the motivator for their actions.
• tsol 3y ago
  Expecting a publicly traded company not to openly support a military committing war crimes isn't pretentious or shocking, actually. It's quite the norm.
• nebula8804 3y ago
  It seemed like it worked when top tier techies were in high demand but difficult to find. Now post the "learn to code" movement and high interest rates the underlying conditions have changed no? Also Elon probably showed you can disrespect your employees to the hilt and you will still get hoards of good applicants because olympic class people want to only work with other olympic class people. If we are going to go back to the good old days™ then at the very least the market needs to see elons companies crash and burn to show that his kind of management does not work long term. So far the opposite is happening.