Slashdot Mirror
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."
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."
Most female employees know that crying sexism will bring the authorities running and catch the media's attention. It's really a shame that a small number of them take advantage of this and absuse the system. My guess is this person lost their job for performance of incontinence reasons and is trying to create a shitstorm in order to extract revenge. We need to make sure that when the system is abused, the abusers pay a heavy cost.
As much as Slashdot likes to believe that sexism is imaginary, this behavior is pretty common in tech. Frankly, I've seen worse.
OK, so you start with the strawman that "Slashdot," whoever that is, likes to believe that sexism is imaginary. But, then you say you've seen worse? I'm a software engineer in the auto industry, and I have never seen anything like what she describes. I'm not saying it doesn't happen. But, if you've seen worse, you have worked in some horrific work environments.
How quickly people jump to the guy's defence.
Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
But just asking?
A subordinate.
By text.
On the first day of the job.
That's not 'just asking'.
Wrong. The boss is in a position of power. Asking a subordinate for sex is a power play and by its nature harassment, even more so on the first day on the job. She was right to contact HR. Especially after she later discovered this wasn't his first offense.
Perhaps it is the HR manager that should be fired.
Wait until you're a salesman competing for an account against a saleswoman. It's an aspect I never see printed, yet everyone knows it exists.
Well that means that the summary didn't summarize - it changed the message.
The problem is that Americans are just prudish. You can't really go up to someone and ask "hey, want to have sex?". Americans will feel at worst, offended, or at best, extremely awkward. Americans view sex as something that is somehow inherently wrong and revolting.
If Americans are ever given the chance to culturally mature, then I suspect things like sexual harassment will go down, as people don't take the very offer as something offensive. Where I am from I can walk up to most women and simply ask "hey, I think you are attractive, would you like to have sex with me?" and she will either politely say no, or accept and we have sex. If she says no, you don't persist. That's where you cross a line.
But Americans? They get squeamish at the mere thought of sex. But that's to be expected from America. They are not as culturally evolved as other countries.
Any sane company would fire this guy immediately. Uber is liable for not getting rid of him. Hope this woman sues the shit out of them.
I don't respond to AC's.
No, it is not, and you are either an idiot or trying to cover up bad behaviour if you claim it is.
Wrong. A boss asking a subordinate to fuck them IS harassment.
I don't respond to AC's.
Asking an equal rank colleague about a date, after working together for a while, maybe. Asking about sex on the first day, like trying a pick-up up at a bar, no. Asking a subordinate, abuse of authority, period.
I know, right? Communism never led to any abuses ever! Neither did theocracies, anarchy, or monarchies!
It also means that the commenters didn't comment on the article, just on their perceptions of it from the summary.
The extent that she went to in her attempts to find resolution were sort of above and beyond. The scenario was prime grounds for a suit, yet she didn't go that route.
The problem was his wife. When she wanted an "open relationship" so she could fuck other guys he should have said "DROPPED" and found a faithful woman. Instead he said "okay..." and then went begging for sex from every other woman he encountered.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
We're living in a zero-tolerance punitive culture now. It's a substitute for have to actually think about offenders and weigh crime vs. punishment. You are either Good or Evil, and your sentence must reflect this.
Ah, the old predictable "no true communism" argument. It's always hard to tell if the person advancing that claim is a shameless liar or an utter moron.
Why didn't you note that true capitalism has never been faithfully tried, either?
1. Apparently the boss did not make sex a condition of continued employment.
He's her boss. That's ALWAYS implied or always the risk.
2. Her first response should have been to say,
Actually I think her first response should have been to knock out his teeth. Failing that going straight to HR was entirely appropriate. Propositioning a subordinate like that is so far out of line that there is no way she is in any way responsible for trying to smooth things over.
The rest of her "explosive blog" goes on to talk about bog standard industry stuff.
The reason the industry is infested with problems like this is because of people like you. Oh sure I mean you might not actually do any of those things yourself, but you defend others that do and when the defense fails, you excuse the behaviour as "standard".
Congratulations, you are part of the problem.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
It really does boggle my mind that people haven't figured out that the whole system of capitalism might as well be designed to create opportunities for abuse.
It boggles my mind that people haven't figured out capitalism is the only system that introduces voluntary behavior such that one even has a hope of avoiding abuse. At least in a capitalist system when you're harassed you can quit, and inform others, and the business suffers. There's some kind of financial incentive to avoid tolerating harassment. Propensity for abuse is inherent to humanity, not the economic system.
What happens when you're sexually harassed by your commie party official? Better put out or it's gulag for you, comrade.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Yeah... No.
A manager asking for sex from anyone under them is a very clear violation of any sane HR policy, not to mention any sane ethical human being.
I work at Intel. We have yearly classes telling us to Not Do This Shit. They're super clear that this sort of Shit won't be tolerated, and for that I'm super glad.
Also, you're an idiot and a terrible human being for your opinion.
Yes. "Just Asking" is a problem and creates an environment that is hostile.
Considering that every scandal posted here during the last few years about sexism and harassment in the CS field turned out to be massively exaggerated at best and flat out fabricated at worst, I am going to ask for a little more evidence than personal statements in a blog.
Not to mention that SV is already a SJW-infested Marxist hellhole which reduces the probability for such stud-like behaviour considerably already. (Not it does not mean it cannot happen, just that it is less likely than it happening on a cattle ranch in Texas for example)
I work in Silicon Valley and don't see sexism in my workplace, except for discrimination against white men. In fact this is my 5th company I have worked for and did not see discrimination against women or minorities at any of them. I have seen numerous claims of sexism that turned out to be false in court (Ellen Pao). If they don't go to court and lose all we ever see are the unsubstantiated and claims without witnesses.
Just like with the alleged "college rape epidemic", these allegations have diminished any real claims. I simply don't believe them. I'm sure you know the story of the boy that cried wolf (sadly it's probably considered sexist to use that analogy). Progressive busy bodies and executives are a much bigger problem than sexism.
Speaking as a student of the real sciences, when we cannot observe something we cannot make claims about it being there.
I like your stuff better though, it must be really easy to write the conclusions.
And it appears that Uber is investigating said allegation. We don't have enough information to know whether it happened or not. That's what investigations are for.
After the Duke Lacross Lynching and the UVA rape hoax, I'm inclined to reserve judgement until an accusation becomes a lawsuit and is litigated.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Perhaps AmiMojo and PopeRatzo both got mod-points at the same time?
Week after week, Uber shows that it doesn't give a shit about its employees (or, as they claim, their independant drivers).
Why would Uber management give a shit about this poor woman? Why do people accept to work for Uber, given the constant reminders that Uber doesn't respect any rule, nor anyone?
I see an allegation with no facts. Anyone working in IT understands how to make a screenshot, if not how to log a chat session. Yet no evidence is presented, and what would the easiest thing be for this person to do? Save evidence, because sexual harassment is ILLEGAL.
Your claim (repeated) that you have to be the victim to see sexual harassment on the scale she is claiming is moronic. It would be visible to at least everyone on that team. There would be more than one claim from more than one person if it was that rampant. In the event it was just her and she over-hyped the scale, she could have this thing called evidence. Yet there is no evidence, just allegations. I'll wait for the court case, and would be willing to bet a paycheck that no evidence is forthcoming.
Sorry, but there are no groups of dudes hanging around conspiring on how to fuck over, and fuck, women in the company. Quite the opposite, since the virtue signalling SJWs are rampant in SF and would have busted the boss to make a name for themselves.
Really, no. The word just implies that there is a problem with something.
I use it all the time when talking about software or hardware bugs or latent ones, ie that may lead to or have already caused a problem. How on earth would that be what you claim?
If you want "dog whistles" then let's try "dog whistle" and "SJW" as loaded terms...
Rgds
Damon
http://m.earth.org.uk/
Actually I think her first response should have been to knock out his teeth.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is sexism in action. No one - certainly not this poster - would suggest that a man should knock out a woman's teeth for propositioning him, no matter how inappropriate it might be. But violence against a man for the same cause is apparently perfectly acceptable.
Unless they are a Democratic President (see: Bill Clinton).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
What are the realistic chances that this particular advance would have been wanted, given the circumstances described. How shitty a student of life do you have to be to realise that asking a subordinate for a fuck on the first day you meet them while telling them you have a partner is not going to result in you getting said fuck?
That doesn't seem unreasonable, but in this case the her immediate superior opened on day 1 with "I'm in an open relationship, please have sex with me". Later she finds out that HR is basically encouraging him by taking no action against a "high flyer", which explains why he (correctly) thinks he can get away with it.
Allegedly.
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.
Innocence until proven guilty should have meaning to all Americans, but seems like many are fine prosecuting without evidence let alone proof.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
clear sexual advances like these without invitation are a clear case of sexual harassment.
So you want to ban any kind of sexual advances? I mean, do you want that people first ask before they ask about starting a relationship?
I must be incredibly old-fashioned to think that getting to know someone, talking, finding common interests etc. should precede "Hey, wanna fuck me? My girlfriend is okay with it."
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
generic_assumption. generic_allegation.
We're supposed to believe that because this is Uber, and because everything about Uber is evil, this is News For Nerds. It would be if there was something about Uber's business model that made sexual harassment a problem on the customer side. But it's about office politics, a sphere in which the same set of problems could occur at Indianapolis Valve & Flange.
In fact, the Uber service model makes harassment less likely on the customer side than with traditional taxi services, because the anonymity factor is absent. If a problem occurs between an Uber driver and an Uber customer, logs show exactly who was involved at a given place and time.
And such cases should be called out. But the statistics still indicate that women are getting the shittier end of the stick in all this.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
Racism, of course. Yours.
Actually I blame feminism/leftism in general, which gave everyone involved the idea that any of this shit was okay and would not result in exactly these problems.
People are animals. So society invents moral codes and customs to tame their animal behavior, prevent conflict, and channel their bad impulses into productive activity. Then short-sighted idiots come along and say "ugh, this is terrible! How dare you tell me what to do I can do whatever I want!" Enough short-sighted idiots go along with this, people stop following the rules, and then start crying when human animals act like animals. "Why are people acting like this!" Because they're people. We had rules to stop this behavior from occurring but you didn't like them, so now you get shit behavior. Start following the rules designed to prevent shit behavior and the shit behavior will stop.
You also ought to get over your puritanical moralizing about monogamy. It's not for everyone.
By what right did you call the guy a scumbag? You ought to get over your puritanical moralizing about begging subordinates for sex. It's not for everyone.
I wish this story could be broadcast to the people of the 1950s. "A company is getting ruined because female engineers are getting harassed by a pervert? Okay, first off, what the fuck are 'female engineers?' We don't have enough male engineers? Why aren't they home taking care of their kids instead of slaving at some stupid company for perverts? They wouldn't be getting harassed then now would they? Okay, okay, so now about this pervert, why doesn't he just have his own woman? Wait he does? Okay so he's cheating on her why what a piece of...hold on an 'open relationship?' She's having sex with other men...and he knows about it...so now he's hitting on everything in a skirt...THIS IS WHY WE HAVE RULES GODDAMNIT!!!" and they'd kill every feminist on sight and we wouldn't have these problems.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Actually I think her first response should have been to knock out his teeth.
And then his response would have been to justifiably knock her ass out and have her thrown in jail. Yeah, yeah, "hyperbole". It's "hyperbole" like this that tries to justify people getting punched in the streets while giving interviews and others being assaulted for going to a Milo talk.
So you do not remember the people saying that it was "just sex"?
You can find someone who will say anything if you look hard enough. "some people said it" does not equate to me saying it and as such, it's completely irrelevant.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
On the other hand, most of the really shitty jobs are done by men.
One can hope that is the case now. I will relate a situation I was very close to at one of the VERY LARGE PETROLEUM companies that started with sexism and misogyny and ended in tragedy.
In the mid 90's my father became romantically involved with a woman at work who was employed as an executive assistant in another department. As their relationship evolved she confided in him that not only was she the recipient of unwanted advances from a certain employee in the sales department, but she had heard from other female employees that they have been harassed, fondled, and even sexually assaulted by this person. Apparently his favorite tactic was to offer to take a young lady to lunch. Then he would mention having left his wallet at home and that they would stop there for a moment to get it. He would invite the young woman inside and then assault her. Management's response to this had been to move this salesperson around the US, kind of like the Catholic church did with pedophiles in their employ. This salesperson was a "high performer" and made the company significant profits, and was protected by the HR department and managers from retaliation.
My father, having a firmly defined standard of fairness and an even more deeply entrenched allergy to injustice, decided to do something about this sexual predator. Over a period of almost 2 years he managed to use the internal electronic message board at the company to rally enough employees into speaking up and the man was eventually fired. In one of the craziest twists of fate ever this person ended up in my industry, working at my company as a salesperson. My father and I have the same exact name, sans the suffix so he had to know who I was.
He also knew one of my coworkers. A stout christian woman, deeply involved in one of the largest churches in our city, and she vouched for his upright character, his beautiful wife and children, and their wonderful christian character. Then after about 4 months on the job he decided he had had enough. He left work in the middle of the day and went home with a purpose. He first killed their 19 year old nanny. It was later learned he had been having an affair with her. Then he killed his two children, 20 months and 3 months, followed by his wife, aged 36. All of them were murdered by stabbing. The police described it as a "very brutal, violent scene, lots of blood."
After killing his family the scumbag in question stabbed himself, shot himself, and drank rat poison. When these methods of ending his life did not work he drove about 70 miles outside of town, parked his car on the side of the road, and stepped out in front of a 18 wheeler cruising down the freeway, thus ending his miserable life.
I can only imagine how this situation might have developed differently if only the company he worked for had not decided to protect this awful human being from the consequences he deserved. Maybe if he had been fired right away with the first offense he would not have progressed to where he killed his entire family and then offed himself.
Whatever the conditions were that eventually led to this, the initial seed of this problem was how he viewed people, especially women, around him. This was, I am sure, exacerbated by his company defending him. Maybe in his mind he thought he was entitled to do with women as he pleased. I don't know. Whatever the reasons are, I see this as a condemnation of sexist activity of this type, as it belies a lack of concern for and malice toward others that resulted in someone killing 4 people and then themselves.
So, I would recommend to anyone who encounters this kind of activity, report it immediately. Don't feel flattered. Get evidence. Remove that person from the workplace immediately and hopefully place them in prison. You are dealing with a predator who does not care for you one bit. They see you as an object that they deserve. Something they can take, use, and discard without a flicker of emotion. Your life could be at stake. Or, maybe the lives of a couple of innocent children.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
I'll go farther: everyone has bad days where they do things they shouldn't do. Especially in matters of the heart and loosely affiliated organs. I'm not a big fan of knee-jerk firing in response to an accusation.
It's the inevitability of this that means an organization needs to be prepared to handle problems like this, and that's the problem here: the organization, not the supervisor. If the atmosphere described here is accurate, then management and HR aren't doing their jobs.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I read everything I can get my hands on so that I can argue against the leftists
"I suffer confirmation bias, and I'm proud of it!"
Learn to love Alaska
They bought jackets for all the male staff, but didn't for the females. That's blatent discimination and sexism from a company. Who gives a fuck what it costs? Buy them the fucking jackets, they earnt them as much as the boys.
She explicitly said they had the option to get a "male" jacket. I don't know off the top of my head what makes a leather jacket feminine vs. masculine, but I've seen a woman wearing a leather jacket from the men's section and, as long as the size is right, it looks fine. Feminine versions of clothing generally consists of being tighter or having frivolous trim or something. There's no functional reason to have a separate female version of a leather jacket except to pander to gender stereotypes. Which is itself supportive of a mild form of sexism, not a remedy for sexism. I mean granted, you can make an argument that they should get all female jackets and the men should have to adjust to those, except as I just pointed out male clothing tends towards the more utilitarian[1].
if it makes the employee's work place a nicer place to come to
That has nothing to do with anything. The issue is whether or not it is sexist to not specifically cater to a separate, stereotypical feminine aesthetic. One that's not shared by all females, for that matter. If the women showed up for their first day at work and their computers had the aforementioned hot pink with glittery flowers (without them asking for it) and their male counterparts had normal looking computers, I bet she'd be crying sexism. But it's the same thing in principle. Equality means equality, not asking for special treatment because you're been sociologically conditioned to hate leather jackets if they don't have a fringe or the buttons on the left side or come in pastel colors or whatever the hell it is that's supposed to make a leather jacket feminine.
1. Well, at least as far as jackets go. Women have a clothing advantage in most warmer contexts.