Related Posts
More Posts
How do you all role out your ERG
Some more jobs where I can refer
Bowl Leader
Boston Technology Corporation is Hiring for below roles (Health Tech Company
1- Senior Java Developer (2-10 years Experience) 2- Senior Business Analyst(5 -10 years in US Health care is must)
3- Account Manager
4- Project Manager (Exp 9+ years)
5- Technical Architect (Exp 18+ years)
6- GCP Engineer (Exp 2-5 years)
Interested candidates send your resume at daieemkhanm@boston-technology.com #hiringdevelopers #javadeveloperjobs #gcpengineer #businessanalyst #javadevelopers #projectmanager #sof
Excellent opportunities in Biological E limited
Position :Assistant Manager /Deputy Manager/ Manager.
Location: Hyderabad
Qualification:
CA completed with post Qualification 3 to 6 yrs experience .
Preferably Pharma and manufacturing industries experience is needed.
Job Description:
1. Strong in Indian Accounting standards grip (Ind AS)
2. Exposure on Audit handling like Big 4 companies
3. SAP exposure adv
Interested candidates can send resume to Kishore.dodda@biologicale.com
Any one knows which company ctc is this?
Additional Posts in Finance
Best advice in 6 words or less:
Which firm hires the dumbest people?
Do you buy the fundamentals for a MBS sell-off?
New to Fishbowl?
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Should not.
Just because you say the truth doesn't mean a company can't/shouldn't fire you over it.
If you sign a contract to work for them, it's probably explicitly stated that you represent them. So if you go against their values publicly as a google employee instead of as an individual, then you broke the contract no? Not sure of specifics of the situation though. Also if was at will employment then def fire
My "^" was @IBA1, not @BMO
@JPM1 agree 100%. But just because you wrote something that hurt someone's feelings, it doesn't make you wrong. I'm not saying I agree with 100% of what he wrote, but the cupcake society is in full effect at google (have friends who work there who said the stuff from the memo directed specifically to google is spot on).
IBA1 and Assoc1- did either of you read the full 10page memo and his corresponding footnotes? Did either of you try to read the document objectively and with a conscious effort to set aside your biases? His memo did not state that all women are neurotic, prone to anxiety, or cooperative. In fact among many qualifiers he used, he wrote "women on average". He also wrote that: he values diversity and inclusion ; he does not deny sexism exists; and that he may be biased and only sees evidence that supports his views but that he is "very happy " to discuss any points further. His tone throughout the memo was respectful. Furthermore, he has a PHD in system biology so naturally he is inclined to view this issue through a biological lens. He used a common psych survey model standard ( right or wrong) the Big Five personality traits, otherwise known as the MFF model. It is not a pseudoscience model. Whether his biology perspective and MMF lens are accurate tools to use in this issue or whether his points have merit are highly debatable and should be intellectually challenged. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with his points.
To answer OPs questions, the answer is undecided. This memo was intended for internal use. It was submitted (rightly or wrongly) on a open internal forum Google created to invite free exchange of ideas. Since Google created the forum, did leadership outline beforehand what constitutes acceptable and non acceptable discussion points? What role did Google play in fostering an environment where an employee felt safe to offer a perspective for discussion?
The better response by googles HR would have been to put the employee on a leave of absence until they can investigate the memo and its impact further. Now they have a PR, HR, and possible legal mess.
The CEOs statement and action also sends the wrong message to his employees and the public. Employee may grow hesitant to voice their opinions and their hidden biases will continue unchallenged. If employees are afraid to respectfully offer points for consideration or share a perspective that may challenge a norm, it may over the long term have negative effects on the co culture, talent management, organic innovation, and risk management.
It was correct to fire him. He's entitled to his opinion, but he's a moron if he thinks sending a companywide dossier full of opinions contrary to the company's official stance won't come with consequences.
No woman would want to work with him after that. Also not great reputation-wise for Google.
^ not an answer to his question, and thank you captain obvious on your second point. I know women, plural, who consider themselves progressives and do not disagree with what he wrote.
Freedom of speech is not the same as freedom from consequences
^thank you. Also, saying women are prone to being more "neurotic" is bordering on workplace harassment. He broke his employment contract, so they terminated him. It's not complicated. If I wrote an article about how black people are inferior and we shouldn't try to hire more of them, and poorly cited a bunch of pseudoscience about how they are all poorly educated and commit a disproportionate number of crimes, I would fully expect to get fired for that too.
@GS1 I guess it wasn't clear to you... I agree with Google's decision. Funny you mention "cupcake society" but the engineer talks about being scared to bring forth his conservative views. Why is it up to Google to coddle his political leanings but not maintain diversity programs to help the disadvantaged, which the engineer is against? His saying things like "women are more prone to anxiety" or are "more cooperative... " Is he saying out of the womb, females exhibit these traits more than males? These are not controllable characteristics?
Nay
From a business perspective, it makes sense what they did. From a personal perspective I bet there's many more people within Google who share his views, he just put it out there and that's not good for business.
Haven't read it and don't have an opinion. I just made a point that snowflaking isn't a one directional thing.
Also, if I state that I value diversity but only hire white male ivy league grads because no one else is biologically qualified to do the job (on average), am I cool with HR?
I may be crazy but I'm pretty sure he said women are more prone to anxiety and being cooperative. Using "on average" as a catch all qualifier to justify his assertions as objective and/or unbiased is, in my opinion, very lazy.
And who cares how respectful his tone was? Why are people using this as some counterpoint to criticism as if it's amazing that someone could write in a respectful matter?
Google might have had a PR, HR, and legal mess if they didn't fire him either, it goes both ways.
Free speech even if it doesn't agree with everyone's view
^ you mean Google's choice to fire him?
Assoc1: my apologies. I was referring to assoc 2.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/the-most-common-error-in-coverage-of-the-google-memo/536181/
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/07/it-may-be-illegal-for-google-to-punish-engineer-over-anti-diversity-memo-commentary.html