Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a misconduct claim

Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by commandlinefan on Thursday October 25, 2018 @04:56PM (#18304516)

The problem is - what I see here is that a woman made a claim that a man did or said something that might have constituted harassment. As any employer ought, Google started investigating. Also, as any employer ought, they didn't go public about the claim, seeing as how that's a violation of everybody's privacy. They investigated, didn't find enough evidence to discipline the accused (or maybe they did, but that's also not, nor should it be, public). Independent of all of this, they made a payout that they were contractually obligated to pay out. Yet with the outrage machine in full gear, it's getting more and more like the only thing any company can do to avoid criticism is to not only terminate without investigating immediately when a claim is filed, but to also include "no accusation" clauses in all of their contracts so that they can default on their obligations essentially at whim. And it seems like most everybody on there thinks that's a good idea.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by geofft on Thursday October 25, 2018 @05:42PM (#18304828)

> Independent of all of this, they made a payout that they were contractually obligated to pay out.

Why did they make this payout and this contract? In other words—what benefit to Alphabet was it in exchange for?

Not damaging the reputation of the company is a common clause in severance agreements. I bet that not being retroactively found to have violated company policy is also common. Would it be in Google's interest to pay out the severance if the employee were found to have stolen corporate secrets?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by ru999gol on Friday October 26, 2018 @03:10AM (#18307337)

> And it seems like most everybody on there thinks that's a good idea.

I think that probably almost anyone is aware of the danger that a system like that, its just that everyone is deliberately ignoring it and weighing it against the PR storm. Its pretty much universal, to throw due process out the window is something that a vast majority of people want to do after any heinous crime committed, something politicians also always exploited.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google paid Andy Rubin $90M while keeping silent about a ... by stale2002 on Thursday October 25, 2018 @09:33PM (#18306079)

> Also, as any employer ought, they didn't go public about the claim, seeing as how that's a violation of everybody's privacy

How is talking about things that happened to you a violation of anybody's privacy?

It is prefectly reasonable to talk about true events that happened to you, especially in a interview, and to even use names.

The truth is the Truth, and your interactions with someone that you are interviewing should not be treated as private.

[ Parent | on HN ]