442

During a presentation by an executive with Google’s Israel branch on Monday, a Google Cloud engineer stood up and shouted, “I refuse to build technology that powers genocide or surveillance.” They were later fired.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/3/8/24094687/google-israel-project-nimbus-employee-fired

@news

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 0 points 2 years ago

In the US - no. In some European countries, totally. The fact I can work without being worried that I'm going to get fired because I've upset some MBA is great for my mental health.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

I find it hard to believe that, even in Europe, standing up in the middle of a presentation and accusing your boss of being complicit in genocide, even if it's true, would not be a fireable offense. Otherwise there would be a lot of yelling matches.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 1 points 2 years ago

You can get fired, but not "on the spot" and at worst, the employer has to pay your next month's paycheck. That stands even if you were fired with good cause.

So here's what would have happened, were this a Dutch company. Employee does the thing, employer says that they should leave, and they offer 1-2 months of a severance so the employee resigns on their own volition and the company avoids going to court. If the employee has more than 2 braincells, he gets a lawyer (there are good pro bono lawyers who work for free if you're not well paid enough to get one). Lawyer advises asking for 6-8 months.

Company has two choices:

  • Pay 6-8 months of severance.
  • Drag the employee into labour court, which usually leans towards employees, and try to publicly argue about whether what they are doing is legal. Obviously it's not going to about whether it's about Google committing genocide or not, but obviously the media won't care, and the words "Google" and "genocide" are going to be in the news in various combinations for a good year. All the while the company has to keep paying the employee, the most they can do is to order him to give back all equipment and prohibit him from contacting coworkers.
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Okay? No one said anything about what he gets for being fired. Only that it makes sense that he was fired.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 1 points 2 years ago

I guess the difference is that instead of being fired, you most likely get to leave on your own terms that you dictate largely. What I mean is you don't get fired, you resign, and can refer to the incident as you have resigned. If you don't want to resign, you can most likely stay in the fucked up work relationship.

I guess the main difference is not what you get, but that Google would have to argue in court that it is fine to fire the guy. And the court case comes before the firing, so if it lasts 10 years like all those cases you hear about, the guy keeps being employed.

this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024
442 points (95.3% liked)

News

36366 readers
877 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS