zlacker

If working with ICE is so reprehensible, why are none of these employees taking advantage of their in-demand skillset and moving on to companies that better respect their values?

I'm sympathetic with those who point out that corporations typically have more leverage than individual employees, and that changing jobs is not so easy for those who are less privileged. That category, though, of "less privileged" with regards to employment flexibility simply does not apply to the average Github employee, at all, as sircmpwn frequently points out.

Furthermore, regardless of which side of this debate you stand on, it is definitely disheartening to see people so vehemently against this relationship yet do NOT back up their feelings with actions. I cannot help but scoff when I see people on Github with "stop ICE" profile pictures. It's nothing but a profound selfishness: wanting to be on the self-perceived "right side of history" but not so much so that you set your origin to Gitlab or SourceHut instead...

>>lurknn+(OP)
> why are none of these employees taking advantage of their in-demand skillset and moving on to companies that better respect their values?

For one thing, many have. I would expect that those who remain believe they can continue to exert leverage to achieve their goals.

>>lurknn+(OP)
I wholeheartedly agree with you. I think a lot of these tech workers want to justify their stance and feel like they did something to help. Anyone working for Facebook, Google, Amazon and now Github needs to reconcile that they are working for companies that throw morals out the door for money (which is what business usually comes down too) and deal with that in a certain way, or leave.

Walkouts are worthless if you come back to work.

>>lurknn+(OP)
It seems weird to expect them to jump directly to the nuclear option of quitting. Making a demand like this is a first step, and it may turn out not to be necessary to quit if the employer caves.

>>lurknn+(OP)
Isn't this the same argument as "If you hate America so much why don't you just leave"? Don't employees have more power to change their employer if they are still employees?

>>wvenab+b8
I agree that employees have the power to change their employer, I merely am pointing out a potential other option that I rarely see discussed. Github is one thing, and an organization that I think is better than most, I think I was mainly thinking of other equivalents, like Facebook, which has _never_ been anything but reprehensible, and yet employees try to believe in this "change from inside" narrative. At a certain point, it is only self-delusion.

To be honest, I dislike America, and do plan to leave it in the next couple of years. I've always considered it a reasonable option :)

>>Latty+C3
Fair enough! Though, you do realize that the whole ICE thing has been baking for nearly a year now? The central question I think is: at what point does the employee realize that discussion is more for his/her sake than for the sake of actual change?

>>lurknn+(OP)
Because leaving is the best way to remove all pressure from leadership to change their ways.

>>Aarons+w2
Github is not making money on its ICE contract though. They took that money to donate it to causes to support immigrants and policy change. I actually think they doubled the amount.

Github from a political standpoint cant drop one govt agency because they stand to lose all their other govt contracts. And any other buyer who now has to now consider they will be dropped if they come down on the wrong side of Github employees' moral compass. Github as a business, especially one now owned by Microsoft cannot do that.

I think Github has tried to do as much as it can to support policy reform without irreparably damaging their business. If that is still not enough employees need to leave at this point. There are many others who would love to work at Github and can reconcile with the situation that Github is in and accept that they are trying to change policy rather than drop the agency and hurt their business.