If that's was an actual requirement, can you make or point to a statement in an official Google capacity that states the notices displayed by the tool she maintained had to be written or pre-cleared by Google's legal team? If you can, was the requirement for legal team involvement established practice and not some post-hoc rationalization for her firing?
"Common sense" often isn't as common or as sensible as some people think.
You often make seemingly-authoritative statements like "it wasn't her role." Avoiding post-hoc rationalizations based on the fact that she was fired, can you explain to me how that was communicated to her?
> Do you really need someone to tell you that if you work on security it’s not your told to disseminate information about hiring?
Maybe if you're fully indoctrinated into a particular corporate culture that very hierarchical, siloed, and highly biased towards management and shareholders.
However, Google, at least for now, has a very unusual corporate culture.
Just to be clear: her "opinion" is "don't take actions that would cause the company to break federal labor law."