Former Engineer Says Uber Is a Nightmare of Sexism; CEO Orders Urgent Investigation (susanjfowler.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report on The Verge: A former Uber engineer has published an explosive account of sexism and power struggles in the workplace, with allegations beginning from her very first official day with the company. The engineer, Susan Fowler (who left Uber in December and now works for Stripe), posted the account to her blog on Sunday, calling it a "strange, fascinating, and slightly horrifying story." It is indeed horrifying. Sexism is a well-documented problem in Silicon Valley, but the particulars of Fowler's account are astounding. She says problems began on day one, when her manager accosted her with details of his sex life: "In my first official day rotating on the team, my new manager sent me a string of messages over company chat. He was in an open relationship, he said, and his girlfriend was having an easy time finding new partners but he wasn't. He was trying to stay out of trouble at work, he said, but he couldn't help getting in trouble, because he was looking for women to have sex with. It was clear that he was trying to get me to have sex with him, and it was so clearly out of line that I immediately took screenshots of these chat messages and reported him to HR. When I reported the situation, I was told by both HR and upper management that even though this was clearly sexual harassment and he was propositioning me, it was this man's first offense, and that they wouldn't feel comfortable giving him anything other than a warning and a stern talking-to. Upper management told me that he "was a high performer" (i.e. had stellar performance reviews from his superiors) and they wouldn't feel comfortable punishing him for what was probably just an innocent mistake on his part. The things only get worse for Fowler. Read the full account of her story here. In the meanwhile, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick said the company would "conduct an urgent investigation" into the allegations, and promised to fire anyone who "behaves this way or thinks this is OK."

Journalist Paul Carr summing up the situation, says, "Uber's ability to be on the wrong side of every moral and ethical issue is bordering on magical."

Comments

I'm not surprised.

[generic_screenname]

As much as Slashdot likes to believe that sexism is imaginary, this behavior is pretty common in tech. Frankly, I've seen worse.

Re:I'm not surprised.

[fibonacci8]

You've limited the scope to "quid pro quo" sexual harassment. The article demonstrates "hostile environment" sexual harassment. There's no requirement that "compliance is made a condition of continued employment or advancement". https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/type...

Re:I'm not surprised.

[t0rkm3]

Even so, in every bit of coaching that I have ever seen, there is a requirement of: request, rebuff, request again, escalate, unless the references are "to the reasonable person" offensive in the extreme.

That also seems to follow the legal doctrine on the matter. An advance is considered normal and human (if stupid, from a manager), the repeated advance in the face of clear rejection causes the condition to rise to harassment. This goes for passive things like, a mudflap girl coffee mug, inappropriate humor, etc.

I agree that the victim should escalate early and often for their own protection and documentation, but the HR person (if they were being honest) did the right thing. If we went around firing everyone for the first inappropriate thing they ever did the manpower churn itself would be a viable alternative power source.

I'm not a lawyer, advisor, or necessarily reasonable. I'm just old enough to see this go around multiple times, sometimes having negotiated successful resolutions... sometime having quit MY JOB because of the treatment of peer and the company's response.

Re:I'm not surprised.

[rgmoore]

the HR person (if they were being honest) did the right thing.

At least according to the article, the HR person was not being honest. They said that it was the boss's first offense and they didn't want to put it on his record because it would hurt him. But the author spoke to other women who had complained about him before she did, so it wasn't his first offense. The most generous interpretation is that they were basing the claim of first offense on his blank official record, so that he could get an infinite number of "first" offenses left off.

It goes to show why that approach is a bad one. If you don't want people to get in trouble for a first offense, make that the policy. Put the offense in their record, but give them a free pass for it when it comes time to evaluate them. But leaving something out of the record makes it possible for somebody to get an indefinite number of "first offenses". Of course it seems far more likely that there was an informal policy of protecting offenders who were otherwise high performing, and the whole thing about it being a first offense was a ruse.

Re:Cake or death

[whoever57]

What's wrong with that? Does she want this guy immediately fired no question asked? If it really is a first offence tell him to knock it off and move on from there,

You did not read the article, did you?

It wasn't his first offence, although HR lied about this, claiming that it was.

He didn't knock it off. Also, her career at the company was affected because she made the report.

What he did should have resulted in an instant dismissal. Retaliation should have resulted in dismissals. Covering up the prior acts by the man should have resulted in dismissals in HR.

Re:Cake or death

[AmiMoJo]

This story proves you wrong. The guy who propositioned her has done it many times before, and many times since, with zero consequences. Apparently he was too valuable to the company, or they just didn't care.

The other comments also prove you wrong. People are making nuanced arguments, suggesting that merely politely asking for a date once is not a problem, for example. The world is clearly not as polarized as you think.

Re:Astroturfing Trolls

[kilfarsnar]

Sadly the left avoids all truth and distorts everything they can for division and agenda.

You would have done better to leave this part out. It is not the "left" that does this, but people in general. It's pretty easy to find examples of this on the right as well. They elected Donal Trump, after all. Neither side of the political divide has a monopoly on subordinating the truth to their agenda.

Re:Donnie Downer

[Creedo]

After Ellen Pao, UNLV, Duke LaCrosse, and countless false police reports (resulting in legal action) about discrimination I'm waiting for evidence. Chat logs, screen shots, and email logs should be enough to prove the case. TFA reports no such evidence.

So, you post this, but don't bother to read the actual account?
From the actual account:

It was clear that he was trying to get me to have sex with him, and it was so clearly out of line that I immediately took screenshots of these chat messages and reported him to HR.

I know, I know, they cleverly hid it behind the first link in the story.