Hacker News Reader

Comment by AJ007 | Hacker News Reader

I haven't paid too much attention to this story and completely missed it when it first occurred (though I've been a Sendgrid customer are their product is great) but your highlights are very relevant. This is the kind of employee you would refer to as a wild card. You just don't know what they are going to do and you have to do your best to keep them out of your company.

Unfortunately for Sendgrid, if she files a sexual discrimination lawsuit they will probably be forced to settle or lose. Because the employee was a wild card any action they take is a loss for them.

View on HN

Such a lawsuit would be a confirmed kill on her career though. At least now she has a chance to someday salvage her work. Adding a lawsuit to the mix will probably mean she'll never be hired by anyone (who can read and is on the web) again.

Adding a lawsuit to the mix will probably mean she'll never be hired by anyone (who can read and is on the web) again.

It's actually illegal to research job applicants in some jurisdictions. For instance, Finland.

https://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2006/11/15/finnish-emp...

I doubt the legality of that will prevent anyone from doing a quick Googling of prospective employee while considering their employment.

I don't have to tell you I'm not hiring you because I Googled your past and did't like it. I can just tell you that you're not a good fit for our company.

It's unlikely she'll be moving to Finland, and full third-party background checks are de rigueur for many jobs in the United States.

At least she'd be certain that her future employers care about womens rights as much as she does.

She doesn't really care though. This was an ego move, first and foremost. Calling it a women's rights issue is an insult to women.

It's quite radical old-school feminism, a style I myself consider no longer deem called for that often, but it is feminism and I therefore would consider it a women's right issue.

Being offended by crude jokes(or finding crude jokes "wrong") is feminism? How so?

I think unwanted sexualization is a recurring theme in feminism and in Adria's perception this was an instance of that.

Most people wouldn't and hence it's reserved for more radical feminists, but it's definitely done under the banner of feminism and thus I'd consider it part of it.

>Unfortunately for Sendgrid, if she files a sexual discrimination lawsuit they will probably be forced to settle or lose.

She gave Sendgrid a good and legitimate reason to fire her. She stated in one of her tweets that Sendgrid supported her recent actions.

I'm not sure she has grounds for a lawsuit.

SendGrid received quite allot of customer complaints about her. Customers were quitting them, and/or making threats of going to a competitor. Then they got DDoSed over this.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, they are located in a - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment - state.

At-will employment don't allow the employer to engage in unlawful discrimination. See exceptions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment#Statutory_ex...

Not at all saying that any unlawful discrimination happened her, just that this may be the base for a lawsuit, eave if she was on a at-will contract.

Actually it does they just can't say it ;-)

Don't like someone's race -- nod-nod-wink-wink => "restructuring"

Don't like their sexual orientation -- nod-nod-wink-wink => "tough economic times"

Don't like the color of their shoes -- nod-nod-wink-wink => "pivoting"

And so on. It can just never be in writing or said explicitly. As long as there is a non-verbal or codified protocol between the owners (managers).

To prove anything is an uphill battle -- have to really establish a pattern, as in "20 people were laid off, last year, 25 were hired, all those laid off were of this race". Stuff like that.

I wonder what would happen if the party responsible for the DDoS blackmail was found.

California is at-will, but with a good-faith rider. Arbitrarily or maliciously firing someone would probably be grounds for a dispute.

I don't think that dispute would be successful in this case, where some demonstrably poor judgment with predictable consequences was used, but IANAL.

Edit: but as pointed out below, this company is in CO.

They appear to be based in Colorado.

Oops, so they are! So yeah, at-will all the way then.

I'm not a lawyer but I don't see what grounds she could possibly have for a sexual discrimination suit. She could file one. SendGrid may or may not choose to settle but it would hurt her career even further. But, I mean, she could have filed one even if this incident hadn't happen.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com