I would have liked to learn about specific allegations of "cruel and otherwise disturbing" from the article, instead of leaving this completely ambiguous.
If you know, you know.
I read the book. Also Sheryl Sandberg comes off pretty badly, buying $13,000 worth of lingerie for her "cutie" personal assistants and asking them to wear skimpy pajamas and snuggle with her in the bed on the corporate jet.
There is a lot of corporate private jet related drama in the book.
The one place they are practical is some traveling shows where a private jet becomes a mobile hotel room/office, a much more expensive tour bus. But even then, you sleep in them on the ground. Not going to a hotel means less drives through the city, which is a pain if you are only in town for one night. Sleep/eat at the airport and you have saved many hours.
Hopefully? Buy it, or borrow it, and read it.
Remove doubt
Or the times when he proposed using lower level FB staff as canaries in the coal mine over governments who threatened to arrest FB employees because the company was breaking their laws... and in one case, an employee was. And Zuck wanted to sit on getting him legal help and out of jail because he felt it would get FB positive PR. And when he was gotten out of jail and brought to a company event where he would meet company execs, Zuck was introduced to him, didn't look up from his phone, and in fact asked, while led away, "who was that, again?"
Everyone makes mistakes sometimes; and if you cannot be told you have made a mistake even in a low-stakes situation like a board game, it seems unlikely you will behave appropriately when it is something more expensive and/or damaging.
Good lord the Wikipedia article about her has more absolutely dogshit behavor [1]:
> According to an April 21, 2022, report by The Wall Street Journal, Sandberg was part of a coordinated campaign to prevent the Daily Mail from publishing a story about a temporary restraining order towards Kotick by a former girlfriend in 2014.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheryl_Sandberg#Personal_life
Eventually the guy gets released and is invited to California to meet Zuck. Except by that time Zuck had forgotten all about it and ignored the guy.
"It's a really important feature to me and the exec team."
"..."
"..."
Actually, the whole Burma trip was a fiasco.
Sarah doesn't come off great, either, more someone who was happy riding the wave until she realized just how many people were getting thrown under the bus for the sake of Zuck and Sandberg, including her and her own relationship - but was also someone with not enough "clout" to push back meaningfully (though it could be argued that there wasn't anyone with enough clout to push back against either of them, let alone both).
That's what it ultimately came down to, those two, like so many other people at that level, do not give one single shit about anyone except themselves, and anything beyond their bank accounts and/or egos.
This is a strange thing to emphasize, but I guess expected for law-trash.
What do you think that pay is for? Stop being weird.
I suppose it's okay for Sandberg to also ask you to "come to bed" in the Meta private jet as well? (to be further met with a lack of surprise when you report it, because "half the department" had already reported that they'd shared a bed with Sandberg...)
I guess the sexual harassment is, as you say, "what the pay is for"?
We use to rave about Japanese cars or German's work ethic. Same thing here. And service people is an okay term to discribe people who work in the service industry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_the_Philippin...
but it came off to me as more snarky than productive, so I did not.
Telling your employee anything can be problematic. Best you never speak with them.
If you've ever needed to buy drugs in the bay area, I'd recommend paying somebody to find you the nearest hondo for the best product at the lowest prices.
>I suppose it's okay for Sandberg to also ask you to "come to bed" in the Meta private jet as well?
I think everybody involved should be fucking adults.
>I guess the sexual harassment is, as you say, "what the pay is for"?
Depends on the job.
Not for me to cater to the needs of some adult-babies who don't want to hear my actual baby on a "late night work call". Zero of the dollars are for that.
This is minutia, that is only being brought up because this is law-trash.
That sort of makes sense. I would question what the value of meta's "reputation" is to begin with, especially in the context of fortune's "journalism".
>Her memoir claims that former COO Sheryl Sandberg spent $13,000 on lingerie for herself and a young female assistant during a corporate trip to Europe, and later asked that assistant to join her in "the only bed on the plane" during a private jet flight home.
Sounds about right. If only you knew how bad things are.
If there are any executives reading this who have, been allowed to, notice chunks of their memory missing recently: there's a chance we made you do worse. And that's okay.