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.
You may want to research the early days of McCarthyism and the blacklist.
Is this the first firing that was perhaps an overly sensitive reaction concerned with appeasing a very touchy ideological base? Because I can think of a number of other people railroaded out of a job because of online "outrage."
We aren't all that far from an Inquisition (not prongs and tongs type Inquisition, but a "your job depends on agreement" type Inquisition). The most significant thing missing from the equation is that the most vocal social justice voices lack political influence and power. If you see this movement organize politically and get candidates in office, any student of history should recognize that things will get worse for open expression of ideas before things get better.
also girls suck at pooters lol
... Google employees who discriminate against members of protected classes will be terminated.
I am curious: does that include discrimination against those protected classes in the job interview process? Like, say, for example, ageism? I am just saying.
You see, it is easy to visually identify some protected classes and subtly discriminate against them (he is overqualified, or she is not a good fit for the team) in ways that are not obviously discriminatory. But nobody in their right mind talks politics or social justice as part of the interview process. So you hire some people who end being a diversity problem. Don't kid yourself, to Google and similar companies the views expressed which challenge the accepted thinking are not welcomed as part of a healthy and vigorous debate. They are seen as a disease that must be cut out.
We are very tolerant and accepting here. You had better be tolerant and accepting in the same way or we will sack you.
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.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean that your employer is obligated to give you a podium. In general, so that everyone can get along I'd rather not know that my co-worker is a bigot or a Trump supporter, etc.
Had this fellow made his posting outside of his employment, things would have been different. But he chose to do it at work, and because of the way Google's merit system works (your co-workers grade you), he marked himself as someone who would not fairly grade women co-workers. This so demoralized a lot of his women co-workers that many stayed home from work on Monday. And the CEO called off a family vacation in order to come back and deal with the fallout.
Bruce Perens.
Google has become an ideological echo chamber where anyone with centrist or right-of-center views fears to speak their mind.
How ironic, because the right has itself become an ideological echo chamber. I used to be a Republican, back before moderates were "RINO's". The GOP of that era knew that climate change was real, and debated carbon tax vs cap-and-trade as a solution. The modern GOP either thinks that climate change isn't real, or that it's caused by gay marriage.
Gender equality is a complex issue, and is full of people talking past each other, so I expect little progress to be made anytime soon. Women should feel completely free to join male-dominated fields like programming and science, just as men should feel free to join female-dominated fields like nursing and teaching.
Yes, there is often enough male misogynists, weirdos, and "those guys" in IT that it would make women uncomfortable, and that needs to be nipped in the bud, both for the sake of women and for the sake of business. There are women like that too. People who are jerks in one way are often jerks in other ways too, and those malignant personalities often have deleterious effects on their co-workers irrespective of gender.
But I don't see people fretting about why women aren't working construction jobs, or hauling garbage. That's because even the men working those jobs largely don't *want* to do them. IT isn't hauling the garbage, but it involves long hours, an often stressful work environment, and a relentless grind. Maybe those characteristics aren't as attractive to women as to men. Having worked in IT for 15+ years, it's not attractive to me as a man either. Or maybe women simply have better options.
Maybe 20% women in programming *is* the natural equilibrium. I don't *think* so, but it's possible. Men and women are different, and desire different things. Men desire income (to attract a wife and support a family), while women often prefer jobs that allow them more free time (again to support their family). If you're a woman who desires income, or a man who wants more free time, that's completely fine (I'd definitely prefer more free time over a pay raise), but it's not the average response.
TL;DR: People are all different. Be kind to one another. Don't be a dick.
"Although political affiliation is a protected class according to California labor law"
Yeah.
In the current political climate this doesn't matter AT ALL. NOT ONE BIT.
California universities have been tolerating violent, physically violent attacks against speakers, visitors, guests to their campuses, violence in reaction to their professed political affiliations, violence justified by student, faculty, and others NOT AFFILIATED WITH THESE UNIVERSITIES by THEIR political affiliations.
This is not limited to California, but to recite that California law declares political affiliation a 'protected class', that is, political association is by law in California protected and claimed to be a right of the people to participate in, express, and speak freely without threat of suppression, is not merely disingenuous, it is an affront and insult to those who have suffered actual physical injury because those with opposing views would not tolerate their speaking.
What? Google fires an employee for speaking their mind. Students and others at Berkeley physically assault people gathering to protest these suppressions of free political speech. In California. Some were arrested. And the attitude that contrary speech should be fought against, literally fought against, seems to be spreading.
The truth is, in California, there is a coalition of political groups agreeing that contrary speech can and SHOULD be suppressed and prevented, by physical violence if they choose to. And this is happening nationwide. Worldwide.
And it is justified by the 'greater good'.
The political philosophy that claims to be tolerant, inclusive, caring, and above all better, is the one that espouses violent response to their opposition. This philosophy is led to this by leaders worldwide, unapologetic in their goals and tactics.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
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.
That right-of-centre manifesto was basically (almost) everything that is offensive in a decent society. The jerk whined about how right-wingers were being treated "unfairly" and in almost the same breath, he was very anti-diversity. In particular, the guy is breathtakingly sexist. He's practically a posterchild for all the things that are wrong with brogrammer culture. And this is despite the other anti-diveristy biases that *already* exist at Google, such as ageism.
While there are a couple valid points buried in that joke of an manifesto, they are completely buried in the mouth-frothing idiocy. The guy was, quite bluntly, an asshole, and I'm glad he was fired. Also, like a cliche right-winger, the concept of irony is completely lost on him.
Complaining that your own narrow-minded, blatantly sexist viewpoint isn't accepted, is NOT an example of the "liberals" being hypocritical. That's the equivalent of complaining that a criminal should not be punished for conforming to "alternative laws".
So protected speech doesn't merit legal protection in California?
REALLY?
Again, illiberal, authoritarian shit like this, coming out of what's supposed to be the most liberal place on the planet should surprise nobody.
"Think differently, just like me, OR ELSE!"
So, instead of a tolerant, level-headed push to better and broaden society, we have a bunch of bitchy, socially maladjusted children pushing darwinian progressivism, group-think, intolerance and and the kind of antisocial interaction you see in nasty little grade school students.
And California isn't just "okay" with this, it wants the entire fucking state to be this goddamn crazy.
Then they wonder why people are praying for an earthquake or secession to take these fucknuts off our hands...
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Having worked at Google, "The Internship" was utter BS. Especially the part where it shows going back and forth between Mountain View and San Francisco as a short Google bike ride without breaking a sweat. Experienced bikers could make that commute in 30 minutes but would require taking a shower.
"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".
Those are the people who should be fired.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
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.
The interview process is protected against blacklisting:
1050. Any person, or agent or officer thereof, who, after having discharged an employee from the service of such person or after an employee has voluntarily left such service, by any misrepresentation prevents or attempts to prevent the former employee from obtaining employment, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
1051. Except as provided in Section 1057, any person or agent or officer thereof, who requires, as a condition precedent to securing or retaining employment, that an employee or applicant for employment be photographed or fingerprinted by any person who desires his or her photograph or fingerprints for the purpose of furnishing the same or information concerning the same or concerning the employee or applicant for employment to any other employer or third person, and these photographs and fingerprints could be used to the detriment of the employee or applicant for employment is guilty of a misdemeanor.
1052. Any person who knowingly causes, suffers, or permits an agent, superintendent, manager, or employee in his employ to commit a violation of sections 1050 and 1051, or who fails to take all reasonable steps within his power to prevent such violation is guilty of a misdemeanor.
1053. Nothing in this chapter shall prevent an employer or an agent, employee, superintendent or manager thereof from furnishing, upon special request therefor, a truthful statement concerning the reason for the discharge of an employee or why an employee voluntarily left the service of the employer. If such statement furnishes any mark, sign, or other means conveying information different from that expressed by words therein, such fact, or the fact that such statement or other means of furnishing information was given without a special request therefor is prima facie evidence of a violation of sections 1050 to 1053.
What happened, I thought we were all end-of-life curmudgeons, not 15 year olds just entering the workforce.
Every single person ever keeps a "blacklist" of people they will not work with. There are many reasons one could find themselves on said list, many real, many petty. Maybe a person...
- were a client that didn't pay up for work done
- were a subcontractor that didn't do the work
- were constantly going on about their child/dog/cat
- drank too much during office hours
- smelled
- their food smelled
- kept going on about something political, no matter the spectrum
- you just don't like their face
- they stole your lunch money
- have an annoyING valley-girl/boy vocAL afflectiON
If you're freelancing, you just don't deal with them. If you're in a team/corporate environment, you avoid them. Welcome to life. Can't wait till you discover that you get free television channels by using an antenna (in most parts of the US). Get off my lawn and all that.
You are conflating the economic political with the social one. Yes, Google is economically to the right, but that doesn't mean they aren't on the left on social issues.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
>I'm so old I remember when tech companies used to hire individuals based on their ability to do the work. How old fashioned!
Really agree with this! And I say this, as a fairly left-leaning person who probably would fit in (politically) with the views that predominate at Google. If someone is fidgety enough to be basing work decisions based on personal politics, I think maybe they just don't have enough real work to do! I want to work with folks who get stuff done, and as long as they do, I don't really care if they are Trump voters, Greenies (like me), religious, non-religious, whatever.
Save the politics for happy hour.
It should be pointed out that the protected class definitions themselves are not discriminatory. Sex and race are protected classes, meaning both sexes and all races are protected, not just women and minorities. If his accusation that certain genders (presumably men) and races (presumably white/asian) were excluded from certain programs within Google, then Google would in fact be guilty of discrimination against those protected classes.
There are some who argue that only those classes with a history of being discriminated against (women, minorities, though for some reason asians don't count in their minds) should be protected classes. However, that is hypocritical - it uses the exact same reasoning used to justify prejudice and discrimination in the first place. You see, prejudice is pre-judging someone. Taking a general stereotype about a group (e.g. women can't code, blacks have lower IQ) which may in fact be statistically accurate, and assuming it applies to an individual, and thus not giving them consideration for the job. You are pre-judging that individual based on their race or gender, regardless of whether or not that stereotype may be true for that individual.
Well, when you deny protected class status to a member of a group who historically has discriminated, you are taking a general stereotype about that group (men tend to discriminate, whites tend to discriminate) which may in fact be statistically accurate, and assuming it applies to an individual, and thus not giving them consideration for protection. You are pre-judging that individual based on their maleness or whiteness, regardless of whether or not that stereotype may be true for that individual.
We are making regular additions to Sundar's List for all collective CrimeThinkers: Classical Liberals, Meritocratic Libertarians, Republicans, Christians, Moderates, associated FreeThinkers, Heteronormatives, Cis gender caucasian-males, Leftists refusing to toe the line, as well as scientists discussing inconvenient biological facts. We read your contacts, your email, your queries, your financial transactions, and shortly, your thoughts.
Dissent will not be tolerated
DoublePlus Love,
Danielle Brown
Commissar of GoodThink
ThinkPol, Google Corp
P.S. Support our Hillary2020 Campaign
Regardless of the reason, California is an "At Will" employment state. This means anyone can be fired, for any reason, at any time. When someone is dumb enough to violate the corporate code of conduct, the firing is insanely easy, and entirely justified. He can sue all he wants. I expect Google will not roll over on this, and make him the poster child for why you should pay attention to the employee handbook.
For anyone unclear on why what he wrote wasn't the best idea, substitute the word "black", for the word "woman".
"Suppose you were an idiot..... And suppose you were a member of Congress... But I repeate myself."
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.
I've been a programmer for 25 years, my ex-wife is one of the best programmers I know, and I would also say I have worked with very few weak female programmers. The reason the number of women in CS in North America is low and the reason the numbers never recovered after the dot com bust is job stability. Women are just as good as men at CS, they are just as good or better at staying with jobs they don't enjoy. However, they do not enjoy job instability. This is why small startups are skewed even more male than large companies, this is why only women who are truly good stay in CS (because they don't fear ever being unemployed), and it is also why women who are good at STEM will gravitate to doctors, lawyers and other engineering fields that have more stable employment.
All the people who studied CS 20 or more years ago. Think about all the women in your classes and in your first jobs. How many are still writing code? Did they leave because of sexism? My ex experienced mind numbing stupidity towards women's needs but very little sexism from engineers - secretaries and HR is another story.
Working as a tech manager for 20 years, I've seen the misogyny and sexual harassment first hand. There were times I had to keep lists of who would work together and who needed to be separated. That is not a "blacklist" unless you're a little snowflake looking for a reason to be offended. That just means you have a large organization and there's always that talented but socially inept developer who has the social skills of a Neanderthal. You try to keep them on, try to work with them on the social aspects. Sometimes it works, most times not.
I did notice there tended to be cultural influences at work in some cases. I'd also argue that the current political climate has increased sensitivity to people who come across as "pussy grabbers."
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
It makes me wonder how Google manages to maintain itself technology-wise if it has no traditional hackers among its low-level workers? Traditional hackers tend to be libertarian, which Google may mistake for conservative. And Google tends to scare or insult such people away — it once offered programmer Zed Shaw a junior sysadmin position. Maybe Google is propelled by sheer inertia or is being propped by Wall Street to make Silicon Valley look like the place is still attractive. Who knows? It certainly can't be its technology when it is starting to look like a brightly-painted sunshine-and-fresh-air leftist version of IBM.
--- Andy West http://andywest.org