“Google issued a stern warning to its employees, with the company’s vice president of global security, Chris Rackow, saying, “If you’re one of the few who are tempted to think we’re going to overlook conduct that violates our policies, think again,” according to an internal memo obtained by CNBC.”

  • Sonori@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    7 months ago

    Well on the bright side, getting fired from one of the largest mega corps in the world for complaining about the company’s providing resources to kill civilians is a hell of a thing to be able to put on your resume.

    On the not so bright side, I don’t like being a background character in a cyberpunk story.

  • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    7 months ago

    Isn’t it illegal to fire protesting workers? At least here in Germany its illegal as far as I know. But it must be a protest event (which it seems to be).

    • Toes♀@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      82
      ·
      7 months ago

      My understanding is that in America, you’re only allowed to protest in ways that don’t interfere with capital interests.

        • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          7 months ago

          South Park would probably be on the side of Google and other corporations, Matt and Trey are diehard libertarian capitalists.

          • livus@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            7 months ago

            I never really forgave them for the original ManBearPig climat change denialism.

              • livus@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                If it had happened like in the 1980s or something it would have been forgiveable but it was like 2006, at that point we all already knew climate change was real.

                • anachronist@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  2000s were peak libertarian for SP. They were against the war on terror so they didn’t code “Bush-right” but they were extremely libertarian. I remember the media trying to push this “millennials are conservative actually” line by inventing the phrase “South-park republican”

                  Still I remember them landing some good observations. For instance, in one episode the boys learn how veal is made and become animal rights activists. You can tell TP/MS are not animal rights activists, but after the boys steal the cows the media, police, government, etc all instantly start calling the boys “terrorists.” It really caught the whole post-9/11 zeitgeist of “anybody you don’t like is a terrorist.”

          • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            7 months ago

            I’d recommend to watch later episodes. They’ve pretty much abandoned the 90s libertarian edge-lord moments and explicitly disclaimed and apologized for it. They’ve had quite a few “wow, we were the problem” fourth-wall-breaking moments in recent years.

      • quatschkopf34@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yes, I don‘t think such protests would fall under the general protesting laws as they have nothing to do with your working conditions.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      7 months ago

      Oh no, here in America we have FREEDOM. the freedom to work! We have something called “right to work” which means we have the RIGHTS to work and quit a job with no contracts. We also gave up every single worker protection for these supposed rights, but since it was named right to work we are meant to believe it’s good for us

      • Whimseymimple@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        7 months ago

        I think you’re talking about “at-will” employment, which allows the employer or employee to terminate employment for no reason at any time. Only Montana doesn’t have that (unfortunately for the rest of us), and employers must show good cause for termination after a set probationary period. “Right-to-work” means that you can’t be required to join a union or pay fair share fees as a requirement of employment. 26 states have this on the books.

        I live in a state with both laws, and it sucks as much as you’d imagine… (mainly because it’s fairly indicative of other issues throughout the state).

      • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        You’re confusing At-Will employment with Right-to-Work.

        Right to work laws make it illegal to require union membership for employment at a place with a union.

        At-Will Employment makes it legal for the employee or employer to terminate employment at-will.

        They’re both bad, you just got them mixed up. :)

      • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        That is not at all what right to work means.

        I get the frustration, but if you’re going to criticize a thing, it’s a lot more effective if you actually know what the thing is.

  • kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    7 months ago

    Love all the people that see repercussions for protesting and their first thought is ‘boy, those guys sure we’re stupid. Now they’ve lost their jobs’

    Maybe the people doing the protests accepted that as a risk they were willing to take? Perhaps even the next steps were mass resignations? Hmmmmmm

    • lemmyreader@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yes, maybe all those commenters could be simply called self-censored vendor locked in. This is also not the first time Google has been firing critical voices, it is quite frankly tempting to say “it happens all the time”.

    • 4dpuzzle@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Google would like to apologize for that inadvertent mistake. All efforts are being made to identify how this came to be and to avoid doing the same in the future.

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    7 months ago

    Is it not perfectly fine to fire people who think it’s OK to come into an office and disrupt work for 9 hours and force law enforcement to be called. I can’t think of a single place that wouldn’t sack me on the spot for doing that.

    I’m not fully aware of us protest laws but i was under the impression to protest you had to do it on public property. Seems like this is blown out of proportion because the writer agrees with the cause.

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        Would a union be able to do this? I feel like a union doing this would be just as bad but Google might hesitate to fire them due to union backlash.

    • Hirom@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      That’s a convenient way to make troublemakers go away. Even it some of these terminations are technically justified, it gives the appearance the company is looking for an excuse to fire critics.

      Protesters probably need to be more savvy and respectful, but also need better protection against retribution.

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        I am pretty sure they could sue for wrongful termination if they conducted their protest properly and respectfully. You can’t fire someone for exercising a right.

        • off_brand_@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          You really can. Right to work, + free speech is only applicable wrt the government.

          The fact that it’s legal does not make it moral.

  • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Google would murder every single one of these people for that contract get real. I can’t see how anyone expected to keep their jobs after this.

    I’m just shocked it went on for like 8h lmao

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:

    Click here to see the summary

    Google has fired more than two dozen employees for protesting its $1.2 billion contract to provide the Israeli government and military with cloud and artificial intelligence services.

    Physically impeding other employees’ work and preventing them from accessing our facilities is a clear violation of our policies, and completely unacceptable behavior.

    “This excuse to avoid confronting us and our concerns directly, and attempt to justify its illegal, retaliatory firings, is a lie,” it said in a statement late Wednesday, accusing the company of valuing its contract with the Israeli government more than its employees.

    Google issued a stern warning to its employees, with the company’s vice president of global security, Chris Rackow, saying, “If you’re one of the few who are tempted to think we’re going to overlook conduct that violates our policies, think again,” according to an internal memo obtained by CNBC.

    The Israeli prime minister’s office and the Israel Defense Forces did not immediately respond to requests for comment from NBC News.

    The workers were also protesting labor conditions at the company — saying the contract was affecting “health and safety on the job” — and what they said was Google’s disregard “for the well-being of our Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim colleagues facing Google-enabled racism, discrimination, harassment, and censorship.”


    Saved 69% of original text.