Comment by ChuckMcM | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ChuckMcM | Hacker News Reader

I think this story is missing some key pieces (it seems like it was created by the plaintiff's lawyer). Still if the commentary suggested is true, then Oracle could be in trouble. The technicality that I wonder about is that this guys wasn't "harmed" by being told to pay the foreign worker less, (mental distress complaint aside) and the foreign worker presumably doesn't know this happened and so isn't suing Oracle.

And all of that is conflated by the fact that the person is already hired so it isn't a hiring question, it is a pay question. And at least in the several "managing legally" I've been to, paying people differently doesn't get you into legal trouble like not hiring or firing them does.

That said, at one of the companies where I worked there was a suggestion for engineers to go to India to help train local engineers, and having their salary be the same as their peers would have in India. (as opposed to California salaries) It was controversial to say the least.

I think his argument is that he was fired for trying to prevent Indian employees being discriminated against, which might be considered unfair dismissal. In the UK being fired for exposing wrongdoing within the company counts as unfair dismissal, I don't know if the US has a similar system in place to protect workers in situations like this.

From the article, there's some suggestion of the plaintiff himself having been discriminated against for his Irish origin... (though no details)

'... "experienced discriminatory and retaliatory conduct based on his national origin and after his complaint of various improper practices, including the company's discriminatory pay practices of employees based on their national origin,...'

Yes what we have here is an Irish guy, in America, suing on behalf of an Indian, in India, who may not even be aware he's a part of it.

No, what we have here is a SV megacorp practicing blatant racism in its hiring (or internal allocation) practices, and then firing the guy who blew the whistle on it.

It's not about the Irish guy, or the Indian guy.

EDIT: for "internal allocation", above.

Maybe, but there's not enough info in the article to conclude that. The Indian guy was already an employee remember. I simply don't know what the relevant laws are on inter-company transfers.

Before we get too carried away. All the Supervisor needed to say was "for someone coming from India" and suddenly the context is non racial and hugely illuminating. Perhaps they terminated the guy because he showed he was too emotional and incapable of dealing with the way the company worked globally when hiring and promoting and transferring employees etc.

So hard to know if he was just making a fair assessment of the realties of different regions or saying Indian's deserve less than Caucasian's simply because they're Indian.

Doubly so if the company is considering providing any sort of relocation assistance, sponsorship, or other similar things which may help the employee realize his move from India to the US -- a move which may offer well over $10k/yr worth of benefits to his overall personal well-being (and his family's).

Country of origin is considered the same as ethnicity for discrimination terms and national origin is considered a protected class under US law.

Saying they where referring to the country and not the race is "not readily believable" to use a politically correct term.

No. It is still discrimination, howsoever euphemistic you make it. He was not to work in India. He was coming to the US and needed to have equal salary as any other employee working there.

Perhaps they terminated the guy because he showed he was too emotional and incapable of dealing with the way the company worked globally ...

If so, then evidently they're the kind of company that seems way, way more concerned with employees who get "emotional" about discriminatory practices... then about the discriminatory practices themselves.

Based on the article, he didn't blow any whistle, he complained to his manager and asked what to do to give the guy a higher offer. Then a few weeks later he was fired.

They shot the messenger. That's the main point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com