Hacker News Reader

Comment by downandout | Hacker News Reader

>Does SV really rely on undocumented workers for their skilled labor force?

Of course not. The idea that Trump's election would be detrimental to Silicon Valley was a fear mongering tactic promulgated by left-leaning tech luminaries. Say what you will about his other stances, but all signs point to a very pro-business administration.

I'm more worried about business interruptions coming as a result of the holy war that some ultra-liberals have unleashed on anyone that they view as responsible for not getting their way in the election than I am about Trump interfering with any aspect of American business. The Grubhub incident was truly disturbing, and several people have publicly said they would cut Peter Thiel out of deals specifically because of his political beliefs. It seems that Democrats stress tolerance, except when they have to tolerate anyone that disagrees with them.

View on HN

"The Grubhub incident was truly disturbing"

Are you referring to the CEO e-mail? [1]

"While demeaning, insulting and ridiculing minorities, immigrants and the physically/mentally disabled worked for Mr. Trump, I want to be clear that this behavior - and these views, have no place at Grubhub. Had he worked here, many of his comments would have resulted in his immediate termination."

Sounds like standard HR policy to me.

[1] http://media.grubhub.com/media/press-releases/press-release-...

I'm not going to split hairs with you or any other liberal defender of this type of behavior. Whether you will admit it or not, you, as well as everyone else that read the entire email, understand that he was lashing out at and threatening anyone who voted for Trump. He intentionally tried to create a hostile work environment for half of his employees. Grubhub should (and undoubtedly will) be sued, probably not only by employees but also by shareholders that incurred losses as a result of the fallout from this monumentally stupid action.

This email, and all attempts to defend it, are far worse than anything that Trump has allegedly said or implied. This is an attack on democracy itself.

Wait, I fail to understand how refusing to hire or associate with bigots is an assault on democracy.

It seems to me this is the free market in action. Your labor is worth so much less as a bigot that you are unemployable. Tough shit.

Unless you want to add political beliefs to "protected classes". But it was my understanding that conservatives don't think the government should be involved in mandating voluntary associations.

So the 60,265,858 people that voted for Trump are all bigots and could have had no other reason to vote for him. Got it.

No, while I suspect that many of the people who voted for Trump did so out of bigotry, some I assume are good people.

And the email did not say to resign if you supported Trump, it said to resign if you would engage in bigoted acts. "demeaning, insulting and ridiculing minorities, immigrants and the physically/mentally disabled" is how those acts were specified. And frankly, if that's how you're going to behave, then you have no place in any organization.

Again, I won't split hairs on this. Since you were intelligent enough to turn on your computer and type this response, you know perfectly well what that email was saying. You are arguing because that's what liberals do when they're caught red-handed doing something very, very wrong.

Pertinent parts of the email:

"... I absolutely reject the nationalist, anti-immigrant and hateful politics of Donald Trump and will work to shield our community from this movement as best as I can......If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because you have no place here".

> half of his employees.

Probably a lot less than half (which lack of diversity is itself part of the problem).

"If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because you have no place here."

So, if you don't agree with what he said about Trump was true, you should leave.

And, yes, that is only one possible interpretation of that sentence. It was not specific enough.

If he's talking about whether people agree that the workplace should not be hostile, that's another thing.

It's too bad he felt the need to inject politics and the threat into this statement. He could have just stated the company policy and ask workers to see HR if they had a problem with it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com