Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think its right to deny opportunity to anyone because of political affiliation. OTOH, if you want a culture of inclusion, you need to make sure everyone knows that out of pocket comments and affiliation with organizations who doesn't promote inclusion will not be tolerated.
Sometimes, umm, many times I find the democratic party are becoming bullies and very quick to state if you are prolife or you can't preach from the pulpit against certain sins or it will be considered as hate speech. That is almost as bad as what the GOP has going on in the White house.
On this, unless you are a politcian or political lobbyist, politics really have no place at work.
I am an independent primarily because I've worked in both the private and public sector. I see the political biases of both of our major parties along with the hypocrisy in both. I also saw that a majority of the people of I know of our major political parties are decent people.
However, political affiliation in the business place is not necessary. You are at work to do a job, not spout your political beliefs and ideals. All it does when you let people know you are a "liberal" or "conservative" and ascribe to some political party (when you don't work in the public sector or political organizations) is portray and additional bias of others and have others direct their own biases toward yourself.
I've seen politics inserted into meetings during my career, all it did was lead to discussions and complaints. One of the discussions was actually lead by our executive officer at the time who was a conservative and accused all the black employees - including a black Republican - of "voting for Obama" and being "too empathetic to illegals" lol - which most of us were not. They also went into a long lecture about why construction companies should be able to be allowed to hire illegal immigrants. This meeting was in response to how our company was going to implement a new state law that stated that we, as a state contractor, were not allowed to hire illegal immigrants and how we needed to start using E-Verify on all our employees. It was unnecessary for the EO to even bring up their own views of the voting patterns of attendees (only 3, including myself, attendees were black) and their relatives hiring illegal immigrants, along with other stereotypical things said about Latinos and blacks during that meeting and others. I had to be my assertive (b*tchy lol) self and steer the conversation back to the law and that we as a private business contracting with the state were required to follow it and how we were going to implement processes/procedures to follow the law. My view of the law had no bearing on the fact that we had to follow it. Oftentimes when these discussions come up at work - similar to what happened at Google, you are asked for an opinion on an initiative/law and you can give a non-political comment or suggestion without speaking of your or others political views. They are unnecessary in the workplace.
Lol... What do you do, live in a cave? If you're posting on the internet, you are already using the products of "liberal" companies.
Sometimes the ignorance is astounding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmondaynight
"It's more important for me to be able to express my hatred of women and minorities than it is for women and minorities to have a place here"
How foolish to you have to be to publish this on a company website?
Internal politics matter to a large company ~ not so much who you voted for. Every single (large) company wants to be on Fortune's 500's Top 100 Companies to work for.
Memo's that read like that and get circulated ~ aren't going to make it happen.
From an outside point of view, this means Google and other companies only want to exist in an echo chamber. While politics should stay out of the work place, they do drive some of our decisions. What's next for Google, not hire and blacklist people who have differing engineering ir marketing approaches?
They won't hire people whose approaches they feel won't fit with the teams they have in place. This has been done since the beginning of the modern office environment.
What's so new about that?
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
I know which group contains a whole lot of people who think certain races and a sex need assistance because they can't do it in their own, and it's not conservatives.
To be fair, there's also a group that gets more help than others (on average) yet swears they're doing it on their own, so there's also that.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
This is what I got from this story, and unfortunately the uber right leaning people in this country. They think their right to speak freely in some way makes society responsible for tolerating and not taking actions against their own words/ideas.
I read some of the memo this guy posted. It was inappropriate in the workplace and could have opened Google up to lawsuits if he were allowed to stay and lead teams that lacked any female employees in particular (since he focused a lot of his memo on women). They were right to get rid of him.
He and his ilk are the real "snowflakes" IMO. They want to talk the talk and then claim to be a victim when their employees and peers don't agree with them. They also want to claim to be some sort of free speech martyr just because they put their prejudice on display. It is sad that people want to be respected for their prejudicial and stereotypical beliefs. They can have those beliefs and even speak about them in our society, but they will have to deal with the consequences of their words like this man did/does.
I agree with your post, and the bolded in particular. Google was right to get rid of him. I read it and it was extremely inappropriate.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
It was HIS truth. And, he had every right to say what he thought was true. Google had every right to get rid of him for saying it, too.
That's how free speech works.
Agree. There's no such thing as 'consequences-free-speech'.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
