zlacker

[return to "Google Protest Leader Leaves"]
1. Admira+md[view] [source] 2019-07-16 14:27:37
>>tech-h+(OP)
I thought this story had already been reported a month ago. But no, I was wrong, that was the other organizer of the Google Protests, Claire Stapleton:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jun/07/google-wa...

So to clarify, both of the female Google employees who lead/organized the protests have now left because they say they faced retaliation. That looks very bad for Google.

◧◩
2. cobook+hf[view] [source] 2019-07-16 14:38:24
>>Admira+md
How does this look bad for Google? Honest question.
◧◩◪
3. CydeWe+vf[view] [source] 2019-07-16 14:39:29
>>cobook+hf
It's bad to retaliate against workers who organize against sexual harassment and gender compensation disparity in the workplace. It looks bad because it is bad.
◧◩◪◨
4. dmix+0g[view] [source] 2019-07-16 14:43:09
>>CydeWe+vf
So as long as you have good intentions you should be free to bring whatever politics to work?

Regardless of how, as long as what your protesting the right things everything else doesn’t matter?

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. Afton+yg[view] [source] 2019-07-16 14:46:22
>>dmix+0g
Protesting against sexual harrassement and and equal compensation are just 'your politics'? huh.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. dmix+mi[view] [source] 2019-07-16 14:56:53
>>Afton+yg
The fact you're conflating sexual harrassment (which is illegal almost everywhere) with an incredibly politicized concept as "equal compensation" (which even within one's own family there are wide disparities in outcomes, as even siblings from the same house can have widely different career outcomes, let alone in society) says everything...

I also don’t like being told I support sexual harassment because I don’t think highly politicized work environments (note I said work environment not society) are a healthy environment. That’s a dirty tactic.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. pvg+Nj[view] [source] 2019-07-16 15:05:24
>>dmix+mi
incredibly politicized concept as "equal compensation" (which doesn't exist [...]

Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_pay_for_equal_work

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. belorn+dL[view] [source] 2019-07-16 18:08:00
>>pvg+Nj
Wikipedia is not a authoritative source. When it work perfectly it is a proportional description of what third-party sources write in regard to a topic, and at worst it is biased opinion based on a few authors. With political topics the most commonly written opinion might not be the most scientifically correct one.

The main criticism of equal compensation is listed in the Wikipedia page in the first sentences under the title Criticism: the methodology by which the gap is measured.

For example, a common argument is that together with a pay gap there is a similar gap in worked hours, about 1hr on average for full time employees in the same workplace for the same job. Then people tend to dip into discussions about gender roles and bit by bit move the discussion further into the realm of politics.

Equal compensation is thus politics. Not because people disagree on the principle, nor because we don't have a data, but because people will disagree on the interpretation and then jump into political topics in order to support their interpretation.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. pvg+o01[view] [source] 2019-07-16 20:02:35
>>belorn+dL
No imperfection in the Wikipedia page supports either of the notions that systemic compensation issues are an inappropriate topic of workplace advocacy or that equal compensation has anything to do with economic outcomes for siblings (???). Both of these are in nigh non-sequitur territory.
[go to top]