Re:Google Staffers Share Stories of ‘Systemic’ Retaliation
by CharlesColeman on Monday April 29, 2019 @12:05PM
(#19779603)
> I would really hate to deal with a second level of bureaucracy when it comes to promotions and such....
I was imagining it more as peer-accreditation and peer-participation, as the other union members would be your peers. Basically more democracy rather than bureaucracy.
Re:Google Staffers Share Stories of ‘Systemic’ Retaliation
by joshuamorton on Monday April 29, 2019 @01:52PM
(#19780735)
Sure, but in many ways Google's promo process is already this way. Its not perfect, but at least IME, my promotion/performance evaluation has been based significantly on feedback from my peers.
Re:Google Staffers Share Stories of ‘Systemic’ Retaliation
by CharlesColeman on Monday April 29, 2019 @05:32PM
(#19782796)
> my promotion/performance evaluation has been based significantly on feedback from my peers
"Based significantly on" is not the same as "made by" or "made in collaboration with." The problem here is an employer using their discretion as a hidden means of retaliation, and they can still do that with all the feedback in the world as long as the discretion is still all theirs.
Re:Google Staffers Share Stories of ‘Systemic’ Retaliation
by joshuamorton on Monday April 29, 2019 @05:43PM
(#19782886)
Removing employer discretion is not a solvable problem.
Re:Google Staffers Share Stories of ‘Systemic’ Retaliation
by CharlesColeman on Tuesday April 30, 2019 @11:29AM
(#19788816)
I didn't say remove, I said spread it around so it's harder to use improperly.
I would really hate to deal with a second level of bureaucracy when it comes to promotions and such.... let alone employer's having to accept "this guy is a senior X now" and realize he is not as opposed someone else who wasn't given that chance. That still seems like a very track type of career path situation where the technology world is still fast changing and has huge amounts of variety.