4 ms·

What would be the consequences to Zunger if he did elaborate? Why must he protect Google from a lawsuit?

nostrademons 12y ago
He doesn't have to on a personal level, but on a professional level, he is an agent of the company and must act in the company's best interests. If he doesn't, he's not doing his job and can be fired. The irony is that if you escalated to Larry I bet he'd think that the quotes documented here are appalling - and his hands would still be tied. Because he has a fiduciary duty to the shareholders of Google Inc, and it is not in their interests to get sued by an employee. Which again goes to show how dumb the idea of "maximizing shareholder value" is, but then, it's the environment we live under.
- detcader 12y ago
  According to your analysis then, he is currently protecting himself. Even though, from how I see it, if action were taken against him, it would generate a lot of publicity and support for him and he would not necessarily sacrifice his lifestyle and living means (this is arguable, but I think it's an important argument as to what extent it matters)
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  I really doubt that anyone's hands are actually tied. He could say whatever he wants, like how it's totally unacceptable and anyone acting like that should be dismissed. He could easily say it's in the company's interest because it shows Google stands up for women, which is good for Google's image and talent recruiting. That's why when people pull out "maximizing shareholder value", I think they're quite exaggerating on what that entails. I'd be surprised if any laws or penalties apply to normal operating judgements. It's gotta be more for scenarios like a company selling a subsidiary at below-market price, or obviously negative-financial stuff like that.
  - detcader 12y ago
    Thanks, this is exactly what I was getting at. I don't know why every hour and day he delays is not an indictment on his character; maybe he is tied in ways I don't know, but if not, why isn't he acting?
- escape_goat 12y ago
  I question whether his hands would be tied. He would be accountable to the board, and whether or not it was fiducially responsible to accept the risk of exposing Google to a civil suit would certainly be a topic for discussion. However, strategic decisions are within his purview. This is a endemic human resources issue that affects the well-being of the company. It would be entirely and justifiably within his discretionary power to react however he saw fit, unlike a more junior office holder who would have a specific job description, a clear set of powers and responsibility, and less political power within the organization. I am not arguing that speaking out would be the correct decision at this time. In fact, as angry as the incident may make him, it might well be counter-productive to address it directly. However, I am not sure that it would correct to say that his hands would be tied. I am speaking from reason rather than experience, and I have no real knowledge of Google's governing structure. I am adding this disclaimer because I am trying to kick the habit of seeming to know more than I do.
- mturmon 12y ago
  I think you are wrong here. It is empirically possible for a CEO to take a stand. Consider the recent case where Tim Cook told an activist shareholder to "get out of the stock" if he didn't recognize certain imperatives beyond ROI (http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-cook-versus-a-conservative-think-tank-2014-2 http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-cook-versus-a-conservativ...).
- RestlessMind 12y ago
  IIUC, Larry, Sergey and Eric control >50% of shareholder voting rights thanks to the GOOG stock split in 2014. So Larry can do anything he wants with Google as long as Sergey and Eric support him.
swhipple 12y ago
It isn't that he must protect Google from a sexual harassment lawsuit, but rather he needs to wait until a proper investigation is done to prevent publishing anything that might be considered libel on the part of himself or his employer.
- detcader 12y ago
  That makes sense, though I'm not sure that it makes up the whole of what nostrademons was talking about.
  - nostrademons 12y ago
    I think it's more than that. Yonatan said "multiple" legal issues - my guess is that there's a legal issue around a potential sexual harassment suit from Kelly; there is a legal issue about a potential libel suit from Kelly, Rod, or Vic; there is a legal issue about a potential wrongful termination suit from Rod if they fire him; and there may be others I haven't even thought of. When you have a complex situation involving the rights of multiple parties, the best thing you can do is stay silent until you have all the facts. This is usually infuriating to the people involved and seems apathetic to bystanders, but you end up doing everybody a disservice if you don't. That's probably the reason for the "multiple obscenities" that Yonatan is thinking; he is in a situation where doing the right thing means being crucified by many people, some of whom are even right according to the information they have available to them, until he can actually ascertain the facts and weigh the rights of each party.
throwawaySEC1 12y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_period https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_period

He doesn't have to on a personal level, but on a professional level, he is an agent of the company and must act in the company's best interests. If he doesn't, he's not doing his job and can be fired. The irony is that if you escalated to Larry I bet he'd think that the quotes documented here are appalling - and his hands would still be tied. Because he has a fiduciary duty to the shareholders of Google Inc, and it is not in their interests to get sued by an employee. Which again goes to show how dumb the idea of "maximizing shareholder value" is, but then, it's the environment we live under.

detcader 12y ago
According to your analysis then, he is currently protecting himself. Even though, from how I see it, if action were taken against him, it would generate a lot of publicity and support for him and he would not necessarily sacrifice his lifestyle and living means (this is arguable, but I think it's an important argument as to what extent it matters)
MichaelGG 12y ago
I really doubt that anyone's hands are actually tied. He could say whatever he wants, like how it's totally unacceptable and anyone acting like that should be dismissed. He could easily say it's in the company's interest because it shows Google stands up for women, which is good for Google's image and talent recruiting. That's why when people pull out "maximizing shareholder value", I think they're quite exaggerating on what that entails. I'd be surprised if any laws or penalties apply to normal operating judgements. It's gotta be more for scenarios like a company selling a subsidiary at below-market price, or obviously negative-financial stuff like that.
- detcader 12y ago
  Thanks, this is exactly what I was getting at. I don't know why every hour and day he delays is not an indictment on his character; maybe he is tied in ways I don't know, but if not, why isn't he acting?
escape_goat 12y ago
I question whether his hands would be tied. He would be accountable to the board, and whether or not it was fiducially responsible to accept the risk of exposing Google to a civil suit would certainly be a topic for discussion. However, strategic decisions are within his purview. This is a endemic human resources issue that affects the well-being of the company. It would be entirely and justifiably within his discretionary power to react however he saw fit, unlike a more junior office holder who would have a specific job description, a clear set of powers and responsibility, and less political power within the organization. I am not arguing that speaking out would be the correct decision at this time. In fact, as angry as the incident may make him, it might well be counter-productive to address it directly. However, I am not sure that it would correct to say that his hands would be tied. I am speaking from reason rather than experience, and I have no real knowledge of Google's governing structure. I am adding this disclaimer because I am trying to kick the habit of seeming to know more than I do.
mturmon 12y ago
I think you are wrong here. It is empirically possible for a CEO to take a stand. Consider the recent case where Tim Cook told an activist shareholder to "get out of the stock" if he didn't recognize certain imperatives beyond ROI (http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-cook-versus-a-conservative-think-tank-2014-2 http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-cook-versus-a-conservativ...).
RestlessMind 12y ago
IIUC, Larry, Sergey and Eric control >50% of shareholder voting rights thanks to the GOOG stock split in 2014. So Larry can do anything he wants with Google as long as Sergey and Eric support him.

swhipple 12y ago

It isn't that he must protect Google from a sexual harassment lawsuit, but rather he needs to wait until a proper investigation is done to prevent publishing anything that might be considered libel on the part of himself or his employer.

detcader 12y ago
That makes sense, though I'm not sure that it makes up the whole of what nostrademons was talking about.
- nostrademons 12y ago
  I think it's more than that. Yonatan said "multiple" legal issues - my guess is that there's a legal issue around a potential sexual harassment suit from Kelly; there is a legal issue about a potential libel suit from Kelly, Rod, or Vic; there is a legal issue about a potential wrongful termination suit from Rod if they fire him; and there may be others I haven't even thought of. When you have a complex situation involving the rights of multiple parties, the best thing you can do is stay silent until you have all the facts. This is usually infuriating to the people involved and seems apathetic to bystanders, but you end up doing everybody a disservice if you don't. That's probably the reason for the "multiple obscenities" that Yonatan is thinking; he is in a situation where doing the right thing means being crucified by many people, some of whom are even right according to the information they have available to them, until he can actually ascertain the facts and weigh the rights of each party.

throwawaySEC1 12y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_period https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_period