a********9
发帖数: 3813 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 USANews 讨论区 】
发信人: addadd9999 (haha99), 信区: USANews
标 题: 被fired的工程师告谷歌的理由太多了，随便就有三条
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Aug 8 13:52:22 2017, 美东)
Employment attorney, Dan Eaton, a partner with the San Diego law firm of
Seltzer Caplan McMahon Vitek, wrote an article for CNN before the firing
which gave three reasons why Google shouldn't fire, or possibly even
discipline Damore (who was unidentified when Eaton wrote this.)
Federal Law Allows Employees To Talk About Working Conditions
Eaton points out that employees are allowed to talk amongst themselves about
working conditions. This is why your boss can't ban you from sharing your
salary with your co-workers. Google went through a different nightmare last
year when employees started collecting and sharing salary information.
But, working conditions aren't limited to salary discussions. The purpose of
his essay was to talk about what he perceived as a need for change in the
company. He shared it internally, that is with his co-workers. In other
words, this just might be a protected activity.
You Can't Fire Someone for Political Views--In California
In most states, political views aren't protected in the workplace, but in
California they are. Love his views or hate them, they are definitely
political in nature. Attorney Eaton writes:
An employee does not have free reign to engage in political speech that
disrupts the workplace, but punishing an employee for deviating from company
orthodoxy on a political issue is not allowed either. Brown [Google's Vice
President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance] acknowledged that when she
wrote that "an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in
which those with alternative views, including different political views,
feel safe sharing their opinions."
California law prohibits employers from threatening employees in order to
get them to change their political views.
The Engineer as a Whistle-blower
Damore claimed that some of Google's practices violate federal
discrimination laws. When we talk about affirmative action, federal law
allows you to hire the woman or minority candidate over a male or white
candidate if both are equally qualified. But, what it doesn't allow you to
do is hire a less qualified female or minority candidate. Damore believed
Google's policies were doing just that.
In order to be protected, "the engineer doesn't have to be right that some
of Google's diversity initiatives are unlawful, only that he reasonably
believes that they are."
Former Senior Google employee Yonatan Zunger, wrote that this engineer
should have been fired because his memo makes it clear that Damore was a
terrible engineer. I know nothing about computer engineering so I'll take
Zunger's word for it. Maybe this guy was terrible.
However, the problem with firing him now is that it is retaliation for the
memo. If Damore was on a PIP and this was his last ditch effort to save his
job, then, no, this memo won't protect him. But, if he was considered an
acceptable performer the day before he wrote the memo, then his engineering
skills can't come into play in this decision.
Damore has stated that he is looking into his legal options. I'm sure a
lawsuit will be forthcoming. | f****6
发帖数: 412 | 2 Google definitely made a stupid move. |
|
