3 ms·

Good. You're there to work. It also feels uniquely selfish. "I love the money but I still want to protest!" If you feel so strongly then quit but that would re

Good. You're there to work. It also feels uniquely selfish. "I love the money but I still want to protest!" If you feel so strongly then quit but that would require sacrifice.

sonofaplum 3y ago
If your goal is to change the companies behavior, then protesting and getting fired and getting a WaPo story is more effective than resigning in protest.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > protesting and getting fired and getting a WaPo story is more effective than resigning in protest Idk, these guys looked unplanned and childish, which lightens the credibility of their claims. They went zero to occupying an executive’s office—there wasn’t even a petition stage. That’s not the kind of escalation anyone wants precedent for, because if you provide it you’d better be ready to make space for a perpetual environmental and MAGA lobby in every leader’s workspace. And while the PR impact of this hasn’t been negligible, it’s also been light. Outside HN it hasn’t really registered.
  - Clubber 3y ago
    >And while the PR impact of this hasn’t been negligible, it’s also been light. Outside HN it hasn’t really registered. I divested all my GOOG stock when the Gemini debacle happened. I figured they were too entrenched in political ideology to compete with AI and would just slowly decay. For me, this is a positive PR impact as it shows GOOG is getting back to competing instead of collecting rents on technology they created decades ago.
- Spivak 3y ago
  Because all anyone not on your immediate team would know is the HR sanitized "they left for other opportunities, we're so happy for the contribution they..." I think it's silly that people will protest like this with the expectation that they won't immediately get fired but that's the play if you want to make noise.
  - the_mar 3y ago
    Power in numbers etc. If enough people quit google then it would make a difference.
- Clubber 3y ago
  >If your goal is to change the companies behavior, then protesting and getting fired and getting a WaPo story is more effective than resigning in protest. I bet they are equally ineffective.
lexicality 3y ago
Do you think companies listen to and take on board feedback from exit interviews?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
  It's egotistical and selfish to speak for and expect such a large company to change for their minority opinions. You can't control Google but you can control yourself.
  - etchalon 3y ago
    You're essentially discounting all major civil right movements as selfish, since all included an attempt to change the behavior of large institutions and companies to accommodate what began as a minority opinion.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
      False analogy. A company is not a country.
      - etchalon 3y ago
        National City Lines (famously the operators of the bus Rosa Parks protested on) was a private company.
      - DangitBobby 3y ago
        Read the comment again.
      - squigz 3y ago
        A company is part of a country.
  - lexicality 3y ago
    How would you even find out if you have a minority opinion without speaking out? Maybe the company coffee machine starts using new beans and I don't like the taste. No one else is complaining, so should I keep my mouth shut? If I say "hey I don't like this coffee" and everyone else goes "it's fine" then I have to get different coffee. If however everyone else says "it sucks" then maybe it'll get changed back.
SadCordDrone 3y ago
This is very logical, albeit sounding rude. I think the parent commenter should not be downvoted for this. If you cant come to terms with what your employer is doing, it's in the right of the either party to terminate the contract. Morality is a subjective argument and non-sequiter here anyway.
- DangitBobby 3y ago
  It's only logical if you ignore the strawman assumption that these protesters assumed no personal risk. Though morality can be subjective, culturally we have coalesced on many shared moral values (a subset of which have been codified into law, for example, it is both immoral and illegal to kill someone in most peace time circumstances). And since "morality" encompasses a broad set of expected behaviors that manifests in practically every facet of our lives, it's unfortunately relevant at pretty much all times. Morality is quite necessary for high functioning societies. Since companies like Google dilute responsibility and behave collectively as sociopaths in the pursuit of money, I'm quite glad we have people willing to self-sacrifice to keep them from behaving a-socially (or, arguably, evilly). Yes, it's probably safer and "logical" for most people to avoid sticking their necks out for what the believe in.
noduerme 3y ago
Absolutely. Have the courage of your convictions to refuse to work for a company you find immoral. I assume these people would have refused to work for an arms manufacturer or an oil company, but maybe they could try to change one of those from the inside.
- the_mar 3y ago
  Arms manufacturers do not actually start wars. While I understand why some people may find that line of work not aligning with your morals, there isn't you can really change within the company
  - noduerme 3y ago
    Right. My point is that if you don't find that Google aligns with your morals, simply don't work for them. If you do, you've already violated your morals. Protesting your own employer just proves that on top of having bad judgment, you also have no loyalty. Two good reasons to be fired.
    - the_mar 3y ago
      I have no loyalty to my employer. I like my workplace, and the work I do, and I think that the company treats employees well. However the relationship is entirely transactional.
      - noduerme 3y ago
        Ok, good enough for you? All work is transactional. But I've fired high paying clients and quit high paying jobs because I didn't want to put my stamp on their politics, religion, or simply what their business model was extracting or selling. I'm serious, have the balls to tell them you won't work for them because you consider them immoral. Take a stand. Something else will come along. Having said all that I think if you don't quit then having an in-office protest without resigning is pathetic; it lacks the honesty of giving up your paycheck and reeks of entitlement.
jmull 3y ago
> If you feel so strongly then quit Doesn't it seem like there's quite a gulf between compliant silence and quitting? I don't know much about these protests so I can't say whether I agree with them or not, but the general idea that there's a black and white choice here doesn't make sense. Also, doesn't it seem likely that many of these people understood that they could be terminated or face other discipline for their participation in these protests? That is, many may have understood they were putting their jobs on the line, right? That's no small sacrifice.

Good. You're there to work. It also feels uniquely selfish. "I love the money but I still want to protest!" If you feel so strongly then quit but that would require sacrifice.

sonofaplum 3y ago

If your goal is to change the companies behavior, then protesting and getting fired and getting a WaPo story is more effective than resigning in protest.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> protesting and getting fired and getting a WaPo story is more effective than resigning in protest Idk, these guys looked unplanned and childish, which lightens the credibility of their claims. They went zero to occupying an executive’s office—there wasn’t even a petition stage. That’s not the kind of escalation anyone wants precedent for, because if you provide it you’d better be ready to make space for a perpetual environmental and MAGA lobby in every leader’s workspace. And while the PR impact of this hasn’t been negligible, it’s also been light. Outside HN it hasn’t really registered.
- Clubber 3y ago
  >And while the PR impact of this hasn’t been negligible, it’s also been light. Outside HN it hasn’t really registered. I divested all my GOOG stock when the Gemini debacle happened. I figured they were too entrenched in political ideology to compete with AI and would just slowly decay. For me, this is a positive PR impact as it shows GOOG is getting back to competing instead of collecting rents on technology they created decades ago.
Spivak 3y ago
Because all anyone not on your immediate team would know is the HR sanitized "they left for other opportunities, we're so happy for the contribution they..." I think it's silly that people will protest like this with the expectation that they won't immediately get fired but that's the play if you want to make noise.
- the_mar 3y ago
  Power in numbers etc. If enough people quit google then it would make a difference.
Clubber 3y ago
>If your goal is to change the companies behavior, then protesting and getting fired and getting a WaPo story is more effective than resigning in protest. I bet they are equally ineffective.

lexicality 3y ago

Do you think companies listen to and take on board feedback from exit interviews?

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
It's egotistical and selfish to speak for and expect such a large company to change for their minority opinions. You can't control Google but you can control yourself.
- etchalon 3y ago
  You're essentially discounting all major civil right movements as selfish, since all included an attempt to change the behavior of large institutions and companies to accommodate what began as a minority opinion.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
    False analogy. A company is not a country.
    - etchalon 3y ago
      National City Lines (famously the operators of the bus Rosa Parks protested on) was a private company.
    - DangitBobby 3y ago
      Read the comment again.
    - squigz 3y ago
      A company is part of a country.
- lexicality 3y ago
  How would you even find out if you have a minority opinion without speaking out? Maybe the company coffee machine starts using new beans and I don't like the taste. No one else is complaining, so should I keep my mouth shut? If I say "hey I don't like this coffee" and everyone else goes "it's fine" then I have to get different coffee. If however everyone else says "it sucks" then maybe it'll get changed back.

SadCordDrone 3y ago

This is very logical, albeit sounding rude. I think the parent commenter should not be downvoted for this. If you cant come to terms with what your employer is doing, it's in the right of the either party to terminate the contract. Morality is a subjective argument and non-sequiter here anyway.

DangitBobby 3y ago
It's only logical if you ignore the strawman assumption that these protesters assumed no personal risk. Though morality can be subjective, culturally we have coalesced on many shared moral values (a subset of which have been codified into law, for example, it is both immoral and illegal to kill someone in most peace time circumstances). And since "morality" encompasses a broad set of expected behaviors that manifests in practically every facet of our lives, it's unfortunately relevant at pretty much all times. Morality is quite necessary for high functioning societies. Since companies like Google dilute responsibility and behave collectively as sociopaths in the pursuit of money, I'm quite glad we have people willing to self-sacrifice to keep them from behaving a-socially (or, arguably, evilly). Yes, it's probably safer and "logical" for most people to avoid sticking their necks out for what the believe in.

noduerme 3y ago

Absolutely. Have the courage of your convictions to refuse to work for a company you find immoral. I assume these people would have refused to work for an arms manufacturer or an oil company, but maybe they could try to change one of those from the inside.

the_mar 3y ago
Arms manufacturers do not actually start wars. While I understand why some people may find that line of work not aligning with your morals, there isn't you can really change within the company
- noduerme 3y ago
  Right. My point is that if you don't find that Google aligns with your morals, simply don't work for them. If you do, you've already violated your morals. Protesting your own employer just proves that on top of having bad judgment, you also have no loyalty. Two good reasons to be fired.
  - the_mar 3y ago
    I have no loyalty to my employer. I like my workplace, and the work I do, and I think that the company treats employees well. However the relationship is entirely transactional.
    - noduerme 3y ago
      Ok, good enough for you? All work is transactional. But I've fired high paying clients and quit high paying jobs because I didn't want to put my stamp on their politics, religion, or simply what their business model was extracting or selling. I'm serious, have the balls to tell them you won't work for them because you consider them immoral. Take a stand. Something else will come along. Having said all that I think if you don't quit then having an in-office protest without resigning is pathetic; it lacks the honesty of giving up your paycheck and reeks of entitlement.

jmull 3y ago

> If you feel so strongly then quit Doesn't it seem like there's quite a gulf between compliant silence and quitting? I don't know much about these protests so I can't say whether I agree with them or not, but the general idea that there's a black and white choice here doesn't make sense. Also, doesn't it seem likely that many of these people understood that they could be terminated or face other discipline for their participation in these protests? That is, many may have understood they were putting their jobs on the line, right? That's no small sacrifice.