From this tweet: https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334343577044979712

> I said here are the conditions. If you can meet them great I’ll take my name off this paper, if not then I can work on a last date.

To employers, that qualifies as a conditional resignation.

I read that, not clear without reading the email whether it was a formal offer to resign.

If an employee tells their boss they have a plan to offer a resignation on x day or do not get y or are considering it they can fire the employee before then, but I assume they can not push around the day they offer a resignation.

An employer not wanting to keep an employee who might soon resign is understandable of course.

I am sure it can get fiddly on what counts as a formal offer to resign and that courts make calls one way or another based on ambiguous language.

Without the email though it's not clear to me. For better or worse it comes across as Timnit Gebru bosses were eager to shoo her out the door though.

This isn’t having a beer with your buddies and spitballing plans. If you email your employer saying give me this or I resign, the employer can accept your resignation simply by saying no to your conditions. It’s grade school logic. They called her bluff and that’s why she’s salty about it. She signaled her intention to resign and due to her behavior with her reports, Google doesn’t want more of that on her way out so she got cut loose immediately.

> If you email your employer saying give me this or I resign

If it's that clear cut it's that clear cut. Without the email I can not tell.

Timnit Gebru said she "hadn't resigned" and "had asked for simple conditions". So according to her the intent to resign was not in her email.

https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334341991795142667

It's possible to not have the intent and still word something as a clear cut formal offer to resign however. With out the email it is not possible to tell where this falls.

Email from Google here[0] and corroboration from Jeff Dean here[1]:

"Timnit responded with an email requiring that a number of conditions be met in order for her to continue working at Google, including revealing the identities of every person who Megan and I had spoken to and consulted as part of the review of the paper and the exact feedback. Timnit wrote that if we didn’t meet these demands, she would leave Google and work on an end date. We accept and respect her decision to resign from Google."

[0] https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334364732480958467?s... [1] https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-a...

What is missing and would make it clearer where things fall is the email from Timnit to Jeff.

Then the language used by Timnit could analyzed and reasoned through to determine if it counts as a formal offer to resign or not.

I not jumping on any bandwagons without at least that or equivalent.

>I not jumping on any bandwagons without at least that or equivalent.

Which is exactly why she has refrained from releasing it throughout this whole drama: plausible deniability.

> Which is exactly why she has refrained from releasing it throughout this whole drama: plausible deniability.

I do not think there is evidence for that. It is normal to remove employee access to email if they are leaving so it is unlikely Timnit would have access to the email to share.

Timnit says says she has been cut off from her corp account as well: https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334364734418726912

The employer can't modify the specifics of the resignation by "moving it up", since that's not what the conditional resignation offered. They can fire her, sure, but they can't call it "resignation". You can't "resign" someone, but you can ask for their immediate resignation. If it's not voluntary, it's firing.

> The employer can't modify the specifics of the resignation

You say this, yet I have seen it done many times.

Of course not being a lawyer of any sort, I don't know. Is there a reference for your claim?

Jeff's email is in line with what I have seen done elsewhere, and given the high profile of the incident, I'd be shocked if legal hadn't been consulted on the wording.