Slashdot Mirror
Google May Be In Trouble For Firing James Damore (inc.com)
Google fired engineer James Damore after he wrote a 10-page document about "Google's Ideological Echo Chamber." taustin writes from a report via Inc. about the potential legal trouble the company may face from firing the "anti-diversity" engineer: Whether Demore is right or wrong, whether one agrees with him or not, Google may have legal trouble for firing him. Employees are protected by federal law when they discuss working conditions with other employees (and this was an internal memo). His memo could be considered whistleblowing, which is also protected (and it is very clear that he was fired as retribution). And, in California, political opinions are protected in the work place as well. Just because one side is wrong doesn't mean the other side is right.
California is a Right to Work state, so they don't really need a reason to fire him.
There's a big difference between firing someone without a good reason, vs. firing someone for an illegal reason. There are plenty of examples for the latter: you can't fire someone because they got pregnant, or reached a certain age, etc. Not saying that's the case here, but if someone can show that the reason for their termination was illegal (e.g. an internal management memo or meeting notes discussing "we need to get rid of all these old people!") then yes, they most certainly can sue for wrongful termination.
That a certain group forms the majority does not mean it cannot be discriminated against.
The most recent well-known example of this situation is South Africa when it was under Apartheid rule. I'm sure there are plenty of other instances.
State of California.
It is illegal to prevent workers from discussing work conditions.
It is illegal to discriminate based on political opinions.
it is illegal to implement affirmative action.
Welcome to California, Google. Did you have a look at the States laws before you gave your diversity monster power?
"His name was James Damore."
But didn't he also argue that an entire group of his coworkers had inherently less potential than other groups simply based on their gender?
No.
Any other questions? Maybe instead of asking whats in it, you should read it. Maybe instead of pretending to be an expert on whats in it, you should read it first.
"His name was James Damore."
Harvard confirmed that he does NOT have a PhD. He has a Masters and he CLAIMS he has a PhD.
Nope. He claimed to have been a PhD student for three years, which is right. Then he took a masters.
Nowhere in the paper is he stating that.
(he spends way to many pages on pointing out the difference between males and females, stating the obvious)
his complaint is about google ignoring reality and giving minorities better treatment because google thinks forced diversity is best.
it's like out of 10 job applicants picking the 1 woman because you need a woman for diversity reasons.
thats the discussion
It is not. "PhD studies" does not in any way imply having a PhD. There is an exam at the end, you know and you can fail that. Or never get there.
You statement is just one more attempt to discredit him on a non-factual basis. Dishonest and repulsive. Because the actual facts pretty much support what he said (which is not very close to what gets reported that he allegedly said).
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.