Some Google managers maintain personal blacklists | Hacker News Reader

Some Google managers maintain personal blacklists

inc.com

99 pointsexolymph31 comments

So people don't like working with some people. That's surprising because?

Suppose you decide not to hire someone. That might be OK. What if a coworker recommends not hiring them because they don't like the person? Again, that's probably OK.

But now consider if you read a list created by various people, many of whom you've never met. The person you want to hire is on the list. You neither have the full feason the person is on the list nor the personal relationship with the perso who added the name to the list. Unlike in the previous cases, names can be added for no reason other than a personal vendetta or a political disagreement unrelated to work performance.

And that's why blacklists are far more than jist "not liking to work with some people". You can't know whether you like working with that person if you don't even know why theu're on the list or if the person who added them is lying.

From the worker's perspective, they get into an argument one day with a supervisor, get fired, and suddenly can't find work at any company they apply for. That's a chilling effect.

I see what you're saying, but if in one interview someone is throwing a million red flags that show they are not and likely will never be fit to working there, then why not make the blacklist to ensure they don't interview again and fake their way through it?

Employee gets sexually harassed by manager, tries to retaliate but can't prove anything. S/he leaves the team, but now they can't find any work in town because the manager put them on the blacklist.

But what if that person is black? And they don't want to work with you because your black?

Or insert trait here_____ Woman Gay Right-wing Omnivore Muslim

yeah but that's not what was said. The only thing that was said is managers keep track of people they don't like.

"A Google spokesperson told Inc. that the practice of keeping blacklists is not condoned by upper management, and that Google employees who discriminate against members of protected classes will be terminated."

Yikes! Actually terminated.

Grammar jokes aside.. they can't really choose to not protect the protected classes eh? But everyone has their blacklists, whitelists, etc. No rocket science.

These unconscious biases make it even more important that 'members of protected classes' join management, rather than people with discriminatory beliefs.

That assumes that 'members of protected classes' cannot also hold 'discriminatory beliefs'. I dont believe the two are mutually exclusive.

Well that is just the law. You can get in a lot of trouble for discriminating.

The company culture is really starting to fall apart. I wouldn't be surprised to see internal changes structurally to teams. Managers should manage but not be able to pick their team.

A junior employee publishes a memo, it gets leaked, there is a media shitstorm because anything one Google employee does reflects on the entire company. Now all of a sudden the culture is falling apart?

Managers certainly should have influence on who is on their teams but obviously not absolute control.

I remember michaelochurch talking about closed allocation for a while now.

I haven't thought about him in a long time. I miss him. HN is lessened by his absence.

The reaction from the new director who started in June sets a tone, the firing sets a tone and the managers who are using their power to blacklist employees sets a tone. These events are changing the culture and image of what it means to work at google.

Some people maintain personal blacklists.

As long as they don't upgrade them to "kill list" then that's fine!

Personal blacklists are a great way to get your company sued.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com