4 ms·

Google fires 28 employees after sit-in protest over Israel cloud contract

31 points by thesuperbigfrog 3y ago

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ratsmack 3y ago
There is an appropriate time and place for protests, but apparently these protesters weren't able to figure that out.
- viraptor 3y ago
  > “In the three years that we have been organizing against Project Nimbus, we have yet to hear from a single executive about our concerns,” the group wrote in a post on Medium. Are you sure they weren't?
  - jsiepkes 3y ago
    While it would have been decent of Google to formulate a reply, in the end it's a business decision. This is not about workers rights such as pay, etc. If you don't like the direction of a company and they don't want to change (or don't care), join a company whose values align with your own.
    - dunekid 3y ago
      Well the company is not a monolithic entity, it is after all a group of people. Is it unreasonable to expect them to change a particular policy, in this case supporting genocide , could be changed from within? After all it was decided to pursue by some execs, and it is jot that hard to withdrawfrom it. It is not the core business of Google. We are not talking about Googlers protesting about the Google Ads.
      - jsiepkes 3y ago
        > Well the company is not a monolithic entity, it is after all a group of people. A group of people...in a clearly defined structure. In Google's case that structure is a hierarchy. The issue passed through this structure and a decision was made. Now even hierarchical companies often have some mechanism to make appeals based on ethics, safety, etc. but either this wasn't done or their appeals were rejected. > After all it was decided to pursue by some execs, and it is jot that hard to withdrawfrom it Mr Pichai was probably at the very least aware of a billion dollar contract I would guess. If they wanted to withdraw from it, they would have done so. > It is not the core business of Google. I think Google would like very much to succeed in the cloud. A billion dollar cloud contract will certainly help with that.
thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
'In a memo sent to all employees on Wednesday, Chris Rackow, Google’s head of global security, said that “behavior like this has no place in our workplace and we will not tolerate it.” You can read the full memo at the bottom of this story.' The memo makes it clear that Google fired the employees for rule and policy violations: "They took over office spaces, defaced our property, and physically impeded the work of other Googlers. Their behavior was unacceptable, extremely disruptive, and made coworkers feel threatened." Would they have been fired for protesting less aggressively?
- jsiepkes 3y ago
  My guess is if Google wanted to fire them for it (even if it was less aggressive) they could have. In most countries you can go on strike, but there are rules and laws on how to do so. Doing some other form of protest (like they did) is likely going to be a violation of workplace policies in a way not protected by law.
siliconc0w 3y ago
I get the whole, "leave politics out of work" but 37signals wasn't selling Basecamp to Israel defense services. How many degrees between your work product and the killing of another human is too few? I do sometimes wonder at what point do we become culpable (like 1940s IBM).
gnabgib 3y ago
Biggest discussion:[0](89 points, 2 hours ago, 74 comments) [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40072295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40072295
ChrisArchitect 3y ago
[dupe] More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40072295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40072295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40060532 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40060532
- gjvc 3y ago
  [flagged]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

ratsmack 3y ago

There is an appropriate time and place for protests, but apparently these protesters weren't able to figure that out.

viraptor 3y ago
> “In the three years that we have been organizing against Project Nimbus, we have yet to hear from a single executive about our concerns,” the group wrote in a post on Medium. Are you sure they weren't?
- jsiepkes 3y ago
  While it would have been decent of Google to formulate a reply, in the end it's a business decision. This is not about workers rights such as pay, etc. If you don't like the direction of a company and they don't want to change (or don't care), join a company whose values align with your own.
  - dunekid 3y ago
    Well the company is not a monolithic entity, it is after all a group of people. Is it unreasonable to expect them to change a particular policy, in this case supporting genocide , could be changed from within? After all it was decided to pursue by some execs, and it is jot that hard to withdrawfrom it. It is not the core business of Google. We are not talking about Googlers protesting about the Google Ads.
    - jsiepkes 3y ago
      > Well the company is not a monolithic entity, it is after all a group of people. A group of people...in a clearly defined structure. In Google's case that structure is a hierarchy. The issue passed through this structure and a decision was made. Now even hierarchical companies often have some mechanism to make appeals based on ethics, safety, etc. but either this wasn't done or their appeals were rejected. > After all it was decided to pursue by some execs, and it is jot that hard to withdrawfrom it Mr Pichai was probably at the very least aware of a billion dollar contract I would guess. If they wanted to withdraw from it, they would have done so. > It is not the core business of Google. I think Google would like very much to succeed in the cloud. A billion dollar cloud contract will certainly help with that.

thesuperbigfrog 3y ago

'In a memo sent to all employees on Wednesday, Chris Rackow, Google’s head of global security, said that “behavior like this has no place in our workplace and we will not tolerate it.” You can read the full memo at the bottom of this story.' The memo makes it clear that Google fired the employees for rule and policy violations: "They took over office spaces, defaced our property, and physically impeded the work of other Googlers. Their behavior was unacceptable, extremely disruptive, and made coworkers feel threatened." Would they have been fired for protesting less aggressively?

jsiepkes 3y ago
My guess is if Google wanted to fire them for it (even if it was less aggressive) they could have. In most countries you can go on strike, but there are rules and laws on how to do so. Doing some other form of protest (like they did) is likely going to be a violation of workplace policies in a way not protected by law.

siliconc0w 3y ago

I get the whole, "leave politics out of work" but 37signals wasn't selling Basecamp to Israel defense services. How many degrees between your work product and the killing of another human is too few? I do sometimes wonder at what point do we become culpable (like 1940s IBM).

gnabgib 3y ago

Biggest discussion:[0](89 points, 2 hours ago, 74 comments) [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40072295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40072295

ChrisArchitect 3y ago

[dupe] More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40072295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40072295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40060532 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40060532

gjvc 3y ago
[flagged]