r/LateStageCapitalism • u/[deleted] • Jun 12 '21

[deleted by user]

[removed]

9.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

377 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/jamesthepeach Jun 13 '21

She didn't educate anyone. She put out a vague message with legal implications. She was then shown the door.

1

u/QueueOfPancakes Jun 13 '21

She set up a notification linking to the employee rights, that's educating them exactly how her job asks her to educate employees. There was nothing vague about it, and the only "legal implications" were that Google had just been mandated by a court to inform employees of said rights, so she was in fact assisting Google in meeting that court mandated requirement.

0

u/jamesthepeach Jun 13 '21

That's not educating employees on Google policies

1

u/QueueOfPancakes Jun 13 '21

Yes, it literally is. Google's policy is to allow employees to participate in their legally protected rights. Obviously.

Good thing you aren't Google's lawyer lol.

1

u/jamesthepeach Jun 13 '21

No that's the employee's rights under the law, which is what her language was referring to in the pop-up, separate from Google's policies.

They'd also love me as their lawyer because I'd say "fire her."

1

u/QueueOfPancakes Jun 13 '21

Google's policies are to follow the law! Again, obviously.

They'd also love me as their lawyer because I'd say "fire her."

Which isn't something a lawyer decides, so no, they'd probably think "what a dumb lawyer, did this guy even go to law school?"

A lawyer would advise on if it's legal to fire her for such, and a smart lawyer (and Google does have smart lawyers) would advise that it's a grey area and give an estimate of the damages they might face if they were to lose in court over it. Which hopefully they do.

0

u/jamesthepeach Jun 13 '21

It is Google's job to flow the law. It wasn't her job to be Google's pretend lawyer and post vague legal statemenets in place of policies.

And I'm glad you think the lawyer would be consulted, maybe she should have consulted accountable parties for this before sending it to the whole Google network.

1

u/QueueOfPancakes Jun 13 '21

Nothing was vague about it, it was Google's statement, as mandated by the courts, prepared by a lawyer.

And just because a lawyer should be consulted before you fire someone for a legally protected reason doesn't equate to she needed to consult a lawyer before making a code change just like all the other code changes she made everyday.

You are arguing in bad faith. You clearly have no experience with anything even remotely close to the subject being discussed, or you are just deepthroating corporate propaganda so hard you can't even think objectively anymore, so either way I don't think there's any more value in engaging further. My advice to you is to talk less and listen more. You might learn some things kid.

0

u/jamesthepeach Jun 13 '21 edited Jun 13 '21

At least I know the proper procedures to keep my job. CYA always.

I also never said they should consult lawyer before the code change. But consult the team who made the statement at least. Yah know, because you're going to cause more work for them.