His claim basically that his 'memo' was outlining discriminatory hiring practices, and he was fired as retaliation for highlighting workplace discrimination. And before that he was bullied for it by management encouraging workers to go after him. The suit highlights that google employees were encouraged to be politically active and discuss politics, except for conservatives. So that's really dodgy for google.
This guy has a solid case, I expect it to get settled because google has a good chance to lose. And at the same time, even if they lose they will make it very expensive for this one guy to win. So it's in everyone's benefit to settle.
It looked ridiculous to me at first too but reading the details about it makes it seem like he really does have grounds for a lawsuit.
Yeah. The more I read about the case, the more solid his case looks.
Now they are looking for loopholes with stuff like whether or not he was espousing “views of an actual political party” or whether “a view being true can still result in a hostile work environment”.
One of google's problems here is that they encouraged a little too much free expression from their employees, so there's all these forum threads from google's internal systems where people talk about ganging up on this guy. And that's all saved as evidence for a situation just like this one. Being such a cutting-edge tech company means all these conversations were in googles 'cloud' systems and get logged and archived.
I think in general it's hard to prove unlawful dismissal, but when you have reams of conversations from people talking about getting this guy fired for his political views, you're doing the prosecutions work for them.
so there's all these forum threads from google's internal systems where people talk about ganging up on this guy
There's more than that: he was sent an email from at least one employee threatening to harass him until he was forced to resign. Sounds like a hostile work environment, to me.
The more I read about the case, the more solid his case looks.
I dunno- it's such a weird, specific situation, I'd be surprised if there was pre-existing laws about espousing views on intra-office emails that the company deems as "making a hostile workplace for others".
From what I understand, existing laws are more about "you can't fire someone for voting/campaigning a certain way, or force employees to vote/campaign a certain. Or fire them for holding a certain political view" (leaving plenty of room for "we didn't fire him for just holding those views; we fired him for sending emails about those views, which threatened and intimated etc" or some such).
Also, given that this is going down in California- given the general politics there, and the massive power and influence of Google, I'd put my money on Damore being bent over, tbh.
He has clear evidence of people discriminating based on skin color and sex. Even discounting discrimination against conservatism, which wouldn’t have been targeted against him anyway, he has a very strong case.
It’ll be interesting to see if he takes the thing all the way to court or settles, however.
He has clear evidence of people discriminating based on skin color and sex.
You mean men? And mayos? In a California court? Against one of Cali's most well-connected companys and biggest employers? I just can't see it playing out like that, tbh.
What's the "clear evidence", anyway? What did Google say exactly?
Yes. While California is very left, the law does not state any exemptions.
Although it should. Mayos and the hetero penised aren’t people, obviously.
But really, you have got to read he court document. Google has this internal messaging service and it is rife with people flat out discussing discrimination against white men. Saying they shouldn’t be taken into account when making decisions, shaming departments that have too many, there is a mention of an event where managers were publicly shamed if they didn’t replace enough men with women, etc.
You think Cali courts are going to set a landmark precedent, that would mean that any employer that has a "Women's engineering program", or 'Affirmative Action', or some "lets get more women in the boardroom!!" policy (which is like 90% of really big employers, especially gov't departments, who love that shit) are now suddenly open to massive, multi-million dollar lawsuits?
Or do you think maybe they're going to follow the same pattern that every single successful discrimination case ever, anywhere, has followed?
Don't get me wrong- I think Google is an SJW nightmare. But from what I've seen, Damore's case is weak, and the courts have every reason to oppose it, and no incentive to find in favor of it.
idk- maybe Google will settle, to make it all go away. Fuck knows they could afford it. But if it does go to trial, his best (slim) chance is pushing the "political discrimination" thing- zero chance the "race/gender discrimination" stuff would come out in his favor.
Lol but if a company is acting unfairly the market will take care of it. People will stop using their services and a new competitor will take its place ROFL
21 comments
1 SnapshillBot 2018-01-09
I can take a 9-inch dildo up my butt, because I'm an adult and I solve my own problems
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 saint2e 2018-01-09
They're really mad to be made aware that in California, political affiliation is a protected class.
1 scatmunchies 2018-01-09
Was he fired for his political affiliation, though? I thought it was because he’s a socially retarded autist. Unless that’s a party now.
1 DoctorFahrenheit 2018-01-09
Forcing women to marry and stay with socially retarded autists is like the main pillar of the Republican party.
1 LemonScore 2018-01-09
wat
1 saint2e 2018-01-09
I don't think that was the reason, so the point is moot, but it's nice to see fake lawyers called out.
1 syllabic 2018-01-09
His claim basically that his 'memo' was outlining discriminatory hiring practices, and he was fired as retaliation for highlighting workplace discrimination. And before that he was bullied for it by management encouraging workers to go after him. The suit highlights that google employees were encouraged to be politically active and discuss politics, except for conservatives. So that's really dodgy for google.
This guy has a solid case, I expect it to get settled because google has a good chance to lose. And at the same time, even if they lose they will make it very expensive for this one guy to win. So it's in everyone's benefit to settle.
It looked ridiculous to me at first too but reading the details about it makes it seem like he really does have grounds for a lawsuit.
1 nanonan 2018-01-09
No, that's why he was hired.
1 TheJum 2018-01-09
Yeah. The more I read about the case, the more solid his case looks.
Now they are looking for loopholes with stuff like whether or not he was espousing “views of an actual political party” or whether “a view being true can still result in a hostile work environment”.
1 syllabic 2018-01-09
One of google's problems here is that they encouraged a little too much free expression from their employees, so there's all these forum threads from google's internal systems where people talk about ganging up on this guy. And that's all saved as evidence for a situation just like this one. Being such a cutting-edge tech company means all these conversations were in googles 'cloud' systems and get logged and archived.
I think in general it's hard to prove unlawful dismissal, but when you have reams of conversations from people talking about getting this guy fired for his political views, you're doing the prosecutions work for them.
1 LemonScore 2018-01-09
There's more than that: he was sent an email from at least one employee threatening to harass him until he was forced to resign. Sounds like a hostile work environment, to me.
1 fsdgfhk 2018-01-09
I dunno- it's such a weird, specific situation, I'd be surprised if there was pre-existing laws about espousing views on intra-office emails that the company deems as "making a hostile workplace for others".
From what I understand, existing laws are more about "you can't fire someone for voting/campaigning a certain way, or force employees to vote/campaign a certain. Or fire them for holding a certain political view" (leaving plenty of room for "we didn't fire him for just holding those views; we fired him for sending emails about those views, which threatened and intimated etc" or some such).
Also, given that this is going down in California- given the general politics there, and the massive power and influence of Google, I'd put my money on Damore being bent over, tbh.
1 TheJum 2018-01-09
He has clear evidence of people discriminating based on skin color and sex. Even discounting discrimination against conservatism, which wouldn’t have been targeted against him anyway, he has a very strong case.
It’ll be interesting to see if he takes the thing all the way to court or settles, however.
1 fsdgfhk 2018-01-09
You mean men? And mayos? In a California court? Against one of Cali's most well-connected companys and biggest employers? I just can't see it playing out like that, tbh.
What's the "clear evidence", anyway? What did Google say exactly?
1 TheJum 2018-01-09
Yes. While California is very left, the law does not state any exemptions.
Although it should. Mayos and the hetero penised aren’t people, obviously.
But really, you have got to read he court document. Google has this internal messaging service and it is rife with people flat out discussing discrimination against white men. Saying they shouldn’t be taken into account when making decisions, shaming departments that have too many, there is a mention of an event where managers were publicly shamed if they didn’t replace enough men with women, etc.
1 fsdgfhk 2018-01-09
So, you think the courts are going to favor Damore's case over this one, for example? Any court, let alone one in California?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2017/09/14/google-hit-gender-pay-gap-lawsuit-seeking-class-action-status/666944001/
Does Damore's case have any objective, factual data (as opposed to anecdotal, he said she said stuff said by other employees) to back it up?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2017/09/09/google-employee-spreadsheet-alleges-pay-gap-women/649969001/
You think Cali courts are going to set a landmark precedent, that would mean that any employer that has a "Women's engineering program", or 'Affirmative Action', or some "lets get more women in the boardroom!!" policy (which is like 90% of really big employers, especially gov't departments, who love that shit) are now suddenly open to massive, multi-million dollar lawsuits?
Or do you think maybe they're going to follow the same pattern that every single successful discrimination case ever, anywhere, has followed?
Don't get me wrong- I think Google is an SJW nightmare. But from what I've seen, Damore's case is weak, and the courts have every reason to oppose it, and no incentive to find in favor of it.
idk- maybe Google will settle, to make it all go away. Fuck knows they could afford it. But if it does go to trial, his best (slim) chance is pushing the "political discrimination" thing- zero chance the "race/gender discrimination" stuff would come out in his favor.
1 syllabic 2018-01-09
There's actually a good bit of drama in the /r/law thread. It got locked, even.
https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/7p0gq5/james_damore_just_filed_a_class_action_lawsuit/
1 Ultrashitpost 2018-01-09
Post it, fam. Or else someone (me) will steal it!
1 syllabic 2018-01-09
By all means
1 anubgek 2018-01-09
Lol but if a company is acting unfairly the market will take care of it. People will stop using their services and a new competitor will take its place ROFL
1 hexane360 2018-01-09
Imagine being this brainwashed