Slashdot Mirror
Google Urged the US To Limit Protection for Activist Workers (bloomberg.com)
Google, whose employees have captured international attention in recent months through high-profile protests of workplace policies, has been quietly urging the U.S. government to narrow legal protection for workers organizing online. From a report: During the Obama administration, the National Labor Relations Board broadened employees' rights to use their workplace email system to organize around issues on the job. In a 2014 case, Purple Communications, the agency restricted companies from punishing employees for using their workplace email systems for activities like circulating petitions or fomenting walkouts, as well as trying to form a union. In filings in May 2017 and November 2018, obtained via Freedom of Information Act request, Alphabet's Google urged the National Labor Relations Board to undo that precedent.
Citing dissents authored by Republican appointees, Google's attorneys wrote that the 2014 standard "should be overruled" and a George W. Bush-era precedent -- allowing companies to ban organizing on their employee email systems -- should be reinstated. In an emailed statement, a Google spokeswoman said, "We're not lobbying for changes to any rules." Rather, she said, Google's claim that the Obama-era protections should be overturned was "a legal defense that we included as one of many possible defenses" against meritless claims at the NLRB.
Citing dissents authored by Republican appointees, Google's attorneys wrote that the 2014 standard "should be overruled" and a George W. Bush-era precedent -- allowing companies to ban organizing on their employee email systems -- should be reinstated. In an emailed statement, a Google spokeswoman said, "We're not lobbying for changes to any rules." Rather, she said, Google's claim that the Obama-era protections should be overturned was "a legal defense that we included as one of many possible defenses" against meritless claims at the NLRB.
A shutdown falls on the Presidentâ(TM)s lack of leadership. He canâ(TM)t even control his own party and get people together in a room. A shutdown means the president is weak.
"We're not lobbying for changes to any rules." Rather, she said, Google's claim that the Obama-era protections should be overturned was "a legal defense that we included as one of many possible defenses"
Thems weasel words Google.
I've got 2 contacts in there and I continue to hear stories about these people effectively hijacking the workplace, shaming others into joining their protests, putting up banners all over the campuses and so on.
Nothing wrong with equality but now you basically have the gestapo running around making up rules and trying to enforce them, people who seem to think their entire job is to stop people working productively and to just push politics.
Google is no longer producing exceptional tech, or at least, less of it. There's a lot more misses now, there's a lot of odd decisions, I feel like management are stuck for getting things done, dealing with these people and moving in the right direction.
I visited a campus a few months ago and it was something /straight/ out of a TV show / movie or 1990s high school drama, I saw a wide variety of people walking around chatting and little productivity. I'd say I saw a 60/40 ratio of women to men, most people relatively young and attractive.
Out of the 3 or 400 people I saw, I'd say, I saw about 5 guys, at most who were your traditional looking neckbeard type programmer dudes (Let's be honest, a lot of us don't present great) - they were on their own and just generally looked pretty out of place there if anything. The only thing I saw less of, was people over the age of about 35. I've never felt so old in my life. It felt like clique club.
But I digress, I've posted this before and had responses here before, from others inside, confirming that there's a good portion of the workforce, simply not doing /real work/. It's a place of business, to develop products and software and a /lot/ of staff are not only not doing that, they're actively making it more difficult for the business to do so.
I miss the days where I thought Google was the most amazing company of all time, near a decade ago. Endlessly producing amazing things, better than others, for 'free'. Now they shut things at a moments notice and 'fix' existing products with UI overhauls that make them worse (this month? Google maps)
"While most rich people are white, most white people aren't rich, as most black people are not violent criminals and so forth."
And just as importantly, the sins don't pass from father to son. White people born today aren't guilty of a crime or owe any sort of debt to people randomly born with dark skin. Just like people randomly born wealthy with dark skin don't owe any debt. There is no score to settle and nothing to correct, the people who committed the crimes and the victims are all dead or so old as to be irrelevant. Your grandparents might have had something coming but you aren't entitled to collect it from the grandchildren of the people who owed it because being in either position was a dice roll. That's the whole point, you can't change what you are born as and that is what makes discrimination on those traits so evil. It is the same lesson we learned about thrones and positions passed from parent to child.
Frankly the wealth shouldn't pass down either. The sensible thing would just be a tax on wealth rather than income. If you can't bring in enough to cover the taxes on your built up wealth you sell it and pay the bill. After all if you can't grow enough to cover the tax the wealth should be in the hands of those doing a better job. Merit.