Hacker News Reader

Comment by sqdbps | Hacker News Reader

It would be nice if Google employees just did their jobs instead of trying to sabotage their employer every other week.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think employees in a free market are allowed to negotiate their working conditions based on whatever they think is important to them and they are also constitutionally protected in their ability to organise.

Are you suggesting they somehow are obligated to work for Google or should not be able to negotiate however they see fit, or not voice their grievances?

I'm not the person you're replying to, but I'd like to suggest that "People shouldn't do X" should not automatically be interpreted as "People shouldn't be allowed to do X".

We could save ourselves so much grief if high schools offered courses on the Hermeneutics of Online Discourse. People are so bad at interpreting each other.

I'm aware of that distinction, but even the former case isn't legitimate. Of course employees should negotiate against what they perceive is unfairness. Not just legally, but culturally. If Google employees believe that many of their peers are not compensated fairly and that executives are biased in their compensation, they ought to speak out.

Why shouldn't they? To not disrupt the echelons of upper management? is that the tech industry now, run like a 1940s oil company?

They should entertain the possibility that they're mistaken and consider contrary arguments, instead of (for example) slandering the person making those arguments and pressuring management to fire him.

what makes you think they did not? Do you think people generally speak out lightly against the guys who sign their paychecks?

Maybe you should entertain the possibility that they, as employees who are aware of what's going on internally and have their own employment at stake have made this decision after deliberation?

> what makes you think they did not?

Lots of personal experience with far-left Googlers and other far left-wing folks in and out of the tech industry. Like their right-wing equivalents, they have an agenda to act on and they're not about to respond rationally to evidence one way or another, as evidenced by the Google memo fiasco. Yes, I'm aware this is a huge generalization, but I'm strapped for time so I'll leave the nuanced, longform version for your imagination.

EDIT: Tried to change the wording to make this less likely to trigger a flame war.

The constitution doesn't protect them from criticism, which is what you were replying to.

God forbid people have opinions and voice them. What a terrible world we live in that the rabble feel they should speak up.

They made their bed now they get to lie in it.

"Cria cuervos y te sacaran los ojos."

I wouldn't call them "crows" exactly, some of it is well meaning, but they are definitely being selfish about promoting their causes with disregard to the damage they might do to their employer.

What's it called when an employer promotes their cause with disregard to the damage they might cause to their employees (and users too)?

What's an example of that?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com