Slashdot Mirror
Google's Other Ugly Secret: Some Managers Keep Blacklists (inc.com)
Last week a controversial internal memo written by a concerned Google employee was going viral within the company. The memo, titled "PC Considered Harmful" and since dubbed "the Google manifesto" on social media, argued two points: First, that Google has become an ideological echo chamber where anyone with centrist or right-of-center views fears to speak their mind. Second, that part of the tech industry's gender gap can be attributed to biological differences between men and women. The person who wrote the memo has since been fired, but the internal tussle has revealed one more thing. The Inc reports: The contentious internal discussion revived a concern dating back to 2015: An unknown number of Google managers maintain blacklists of fellow employees, evidently refusing to work with those people. The blacklists are based on personal experiences of others' behavior, including views expressed on politics, social justice issues, and Google's diversity efforts. Inc. reviewed screenshots documenting several managers attesting to this practice, both in the past and currently, explicitly using the term "blacklist." The screenshots were shared by a Google employee who requested anonymity due to having signed an NDA. In additional screenshots, one Google employee declared his intent to quit if Damore were not fired, and another said that he would refuse to work with Damore in any capacity. A Google spokesperson told Inc. that the practice of keeping blacklists is not condoned by upper management, and that Google employees who discriminate against members of protected classes will be terminated. It's not clear whether that principle applies in Damore's case. Although political affiliation is a protected class according to California labor law, the views expressed in the manifesto and echoed by others who oppose political correctness do not seem to merit legal protection.
Is there anything wrong with this? I also have a personal list of people I don't want to work with.
it's not as if anyone at Google tries to enforce the list on other companies.
Over my 20+ year career as an IT Support contractor, I've kept a blacklist of recruiters that I refused to deal with. Tek Systems, Robert Half and Microsoft tops my blacklist.
Tek Systems always call you in for an interview, are more interested in who you interviewed with previously than your qualifications, and never offer a job after repeated interviews.
The San Jose office for Robert Half have recruiters who always get a better job for themselves than trying to help you get a job. I went through six recruiters in three month because of the turnover.
Microsoft requires that the hiring manager considers five applicants even though he plans to hire his drinking buddy. During a six week period in 2005, I had five Microsoft recruiters leading me by the nose for jobs that went to drinking buddies.
Most places that I've worked has had pretty strict prohibitions on discussing politics or religion in the workplace, no matter what flavor of those things is involved. For good and obvious reasons, I think -- such discussions can only lead to grief and strife among people who would otherwise be able to work productively together. I'm a bit surprised that Google allows it.
Also, I'm not clear on what is meant by "blacklist". Typically, that means a list of people who are ineligible for (whatever) that is distributed within an organization and everyone is expected to adhere to.
But the article makes it sound like something rather different: individuals deciding that they can't work with other individuals. This is pretty normal. I know that in most places that I've worked, there have been people that I would go to great lengths to avoid interacting with, and in a managerial role, there have been people who I would not accept on my team because of personality issues.
Is that a "blacklist"? I don't think so. I think it's more about wanting to have teams that can function well together. Being able to get along well in a team is as important as technical skill.
You are offensive to a decent society. You're post was nothing but whining vitriol, with not even one counter argument to anything the paper contained. Yet, you equate the author with a criminal because his view of the world differs from yours. You're post is worthless and we are all dumber for having read it.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
There's not a whole lot that the Y chromosome carries, and there are predictions that it will atrophy into carrying no information in 4.6 million years at the current rate of decay: https://www.quantamagazine.org...
While the X chromosome carries 1,000 or so genes, the Y chromosome currently carries 200 genes and declining: http://gizmodo.com/the-y-chrom...
Most of what people think the "male" chromosome carries is based on unscientific knowledge. Your chest hair, beard, and other male traits, do not come from the Y chromosome, but are instead expressions of the X chromosome under high levels of testosterone. That's why people without the Y chromosome can have sex-change operations and get a beard, chest hair, etc. by taking testosterone supplements. Testosterone also increases aggression and risk-taking, even for individuals without the Y chromosome.
And last night I was reading about Forrest Mims and Ed Roberts and the the Home Brew computer club. It kinda sounded like all this microcomputer nonsense got its start in the world of ham radio electronics enthusiasts. So why not look there for answers since there is a hundred years of global statistical data?
I'm so old I remember when tech companies used to hire individuals based on their ability to do the work..
No. You simply remember the times you were hired and your self-belief makes you assume that you were the most qualified applicant. It's not true now and never has been.
Wow, thanks for this. The guy makes a reasoned, careful argument. He's very adamant that he does not endorse applying stereotypes to individuals, and he accepts that we all have biases.
I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but it seems to me there is a culture problem at Google if he was really fired for authoring such a mild document. I have to assume that this document didn't come out of a vacuum and that there is more to this story.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.