Executive accused of harassment at Alphabet 'X' unit is out

https://www.axios.com/executive-accused-of-harassment-at-alphabet-x-unit-is-out-6f583d1e-91e3-4a8b-ae2b-51fd4517ec74.html

by jpm_sd • 8 years ago

115 58 8 years ago

axios.com

astrodust• 8 years ago

They've got an awful lot of house-cleaning to do, this is just the start.

caseysoftware• 8 years ago

All their posturing and positioning lately is looking more and more like over compensating.

Cut out this sort of crap first.

rdtsc2• 8 years ago

That's always how it works. To make sure everything stays hidden for years it has to be combined with a robust yet superficial call for antiharrasment. Lots of blogs and talks about it. This is not unlike say Harvey Weinstein showing up at the Women's March.

HiroshiSan• 8 years ago

One consequence of this naming and shaming type editorial is that you end up with paragraphs like these:

"In the Times story, DeVaul allegedly invited hardware engineer Star Simpson, who was interviewing to work at Google, to the art and culture festival Burning Man, telling her he and his wife were polyamorous. Simpson attended the festival in hopes it would improve her chances of getting hired — she brought her mother with her and “professional attire,” according to the Times. Yet DeVaul encouraged her to remove her clothing and asked to give her a massage."

bitwize• 8 years ago

Wow, small world.I think this is the same girl who was arrested as a suspected terrorist a few years back because as far as the BoPo is concerned, exposed circuit board + blinking lights = bomb.

geezerjay2• 8 years ago

For those of us wondering, here's a link:

https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Student_arrested_over_%22art%22...

thrower123• 8 years ago

In the Times story, DeVaul allegedly invited hardware engineer Star Simpson, who was interviewing to work at Google, to the art and culture festival Burning Man, telling her he and his wife were polyamorous. Simpson attended the festival in hopes it would improve her chances of getting hired — she brought her mother with her and “professional attire,” according to the Times. Yet DeVaul encouraged her to remove her clothing and asked to give her a massage.
Later on, Simpson learned that she did not get the job, and that DeVaul knew this when she chose to attend Burning Man.
he thought Simpson had been aware that she did not get the job when she attended the festival.

This is all kinds of weird, and I am not sure how I feel about any of it. It seems like a failure to communicate all around, with some information asymmetry muddying the waters.

On one hand, what the hell are you discussing your sexual relationship with your wife to an interviewee for? How does that come up in an interview process?

On the other hand, Burning Man is not a place one goes to for professional reasons. Unless you've been under a rock, you know what Burning Man is, and what goes on there.

packetslave• 8 years ago

I don't recall the source, but I believe Star Simpson had attended Burning Man multiple times prior to the incident. Whatever the reasoning behind this situation, it wasn't because she didn't know what the festival was all about.

empath75• 8 years ago

It’s not about sexual assault anyway.

sp332• 8 years ago

If the interviewer invites you to Burning Man, it could definitely have professional consequences.

moate2• 8 years ago

I know exactly how I feel about this: Gross!

Telling someone that's interviewing "you should come to burning man because my wife and I are swingers" is gross and inappropriate (borderline illegal?).

If you're inclined to ask someone who you were interviewing for a job to come do sex to you and your wife, I think it's a very reasonable expectation that you confirm this person is aware they have not gotten the job. Doubly so when you're an executive of one of the largest companies in the world. Seems like this is extremely poor judgement at best, and abuse of his position/the implication of a job at worst.

sverige• 8 years ago

If you're inclined to ask someone who you were interviewing for a job to come do sex to you and your wife,...

Exactly right. Stop right there. You've gone over the line of professional behavior into something far below that standard.

This is always unacceptable. Sorry if that cramps someone's social life, but there are other places to look for sex partners.

jtr_47• 8 years ago

What kind of person would consider going or being interviewed after they heard that statement? Regardless if they wore a suit and brought their mother to the event. It shows that you may be interested but are testing the waters? If this person really wanted the job, it looks like she would have done almost anything to get it.

I do not condone the behavior of either party involved. But at least one person should be strong enough to say no thanks, I don't believe in compromising my integrity for an interview with those requirements attached. I'd report this to HR ASAP too.

peace.

rayiner5• 8 years ago

On the other hand, Burning Man is not a place one goes to for professional reasons. Unless you've been under a rock, you know what Burning Man is, and what goes on there.

Do men not ever talk shop at Burning Man?

This isn’t muddy at all. If someone invites me somewhere after an interview, I assume (as a man) it’s work related. Women should be able to make the same assumption. And interviewers should never be sexually propositioning candidates. (The excuse that she hadn’t gotten the job is worthless, because if that’s an out it creates a huge conflict of interest and incentive to torpedo candidates because of the interviewer’s attraction.)

quadcore• 8 years ago

This is all kinds of weird

This isnt weird at all. It's exactly how harassment works. One individual is in a weak position and someone exploit that weakness. The person in the weak position will do: false confessions, unwanted sexual activities, unwanted financial transactions (for lack of better term), etc, in order to survive.

Was she interviewed for a job in relation with DeVaul? Anything he does that's sex or finance related toward Simpson is therefore harassment. At least, by my book.

rayiner5• 8 years ago

Was she interviewed for a job in relation with DeVaul? Anything he does that's sex or finance related toward Simpson is therefore harassment. At least, by my book.

Thank you! It’s not complicated. Be a g-ddamn grownup, treat your professional position with respect, and don’t make sexual passes at people you meet because they came in for an interview.

tschwimmer• 8 years ago

On the other hand, Burning Man is not a place one goes to for professional reasons. Unless you've been under a rock, you know what Burning Man is, and what goes on there.

This is not strictly true. I know someone that went to Burning Man to find investors for his company and was successful in doing so.

electrichead• 8 years ago

That's not quite the same thing. He went there to find people who would be the type that go to events like this.

If you want to compare apples-to-apples, your friend would have been invited to Burning Man as part of the process of investing in his company (with it being implied that it is in their best interest to attend).

rdtsc2• 8 years ago

Unless you've been under a rock, you know what Burning Man is, and what goes on there.

Or unless you are smart and know exactly what you're doing. She brought her mom and conservative clothes. Now there is both a witness if he decides to do anything more and him having to explain the background of his new employee getting there ... along with her mom.

It was a pretty good tactical move. Granted he ended staying as a director for all those years. And I think that tells us quite a bit about Google's values and culture.

I remember really wanting to work at Google. I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole these days.

skh• 8 years ago

Do no evil apparently does not extend to doing the right thing. It should not take publicity to force companies/people to do the right thing.

ConceptJunkie• 8 years ago

It was "Don't be evil." and they dropped it a while ago. At least they're being honest by omission.

delroth2• 8 years ago

Open https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html and ^F "evil".

You should verify your facts before repeating provably false information.

relaunched• 8 years ago

It seems like many leaders fall down when it comes to protecting the company. It seems like leaders may fail to understand that no one person makes or breaks a company, not a great company anyway. There are many more people willing and able to step up, then their are opportunities to step up into - no matter what the job is.

I find it impossible to believe that lawyers are giving sub-optimal advice. Generally, it's probably situations where lawyers say "x is the best practice", leaders say, "what else do you have" and they end up with some sort of compromising, risk-accepting solution - a la any number of Google recent announcements or any other number of companies that bury things until it makes the headlines.

natch2• 8 years ago

If the allegations about Rubin are true, whoever greenlighted Rubin's exit package should also resign.

asdfasgasdgasdg2• 8 years ago

Exit package that big? You'd be looking at the CEO and the Chairman. Fat chance. :-/

natch2• 8 years ago

And some board members possibly. In any case whoever it is has lost any respectability.

FireBeyond• 8 years ago

Alphabet CEO Larry Page, who was aware of the allegations and the investigation’s findings, did not disclose publicly Rubin’s reason for leaving, saying in a statement at the time, “I want to wish Andy all the best with what’s next.”

Maybe Google could invest in his next venture, like they did with Andy Rubin...

GeekyBear• 8 years ago

The problem for Google is that the company has condoned these sorts of inappropriate behaviors right from the start and from the very highest levels of the company.

Here Fisher quotes Google’s first executive chef, Charlie Ayers, and Heather Cairns, the company’s first HR manager:

Charlie Ayers: Sergey’s the Google playboy. He was known for getting his fingers caught in the cookie jar with employees that worked for the company in the masseuse room. He got around.

Heather Cairns: And we didn’t have locks, so you can’t help it if you walk in on people if there’s no lock. Remember, we’re a bunch of twentysomethings except for me—ancient at 35, so there’s some hormones and they’re raging.

Charlie Ayers: H.R. told me that Sergey’s response to it was, “Why not? They’re my employees.” But you don’t have employees for fucking! That’s not what the job is.

Heather Cairns: Oh my God: This is a sexual harassment claim waiting to happen! That was my concern.

https://qz.com/work/1326942/sergey-brin-started-google-with-...

cududa• 8 years ago

Interesting this is the top comment when in the thread discussing the original article and abuse it was basically a series of hits against Ms. Simpson (the accuser in this instance)

roenxi• 8 years ago

There are interesting questions about how bad this is compared to executive shenanigans in other major corporations.

There are going to be men who just like money and power, but there are also going to be stereotypical men who seek out money and power to translate into creating sexual opportunity. Presumably Google is not going to have an unusually skewed executive either way.

asdfasgasdgasdg2• 8 years ago

The problem for Google is that the company has condoned . . .

That is a problem, but it is not the problem. The problem is developing good practices for handling harassment situations going forward. We can fret over what has been done, but we can only change the future.

georgeburdell• 8 years ago

The hubris displayed by Google and other tech companies in their response to sexual harassment claims suggests to me that they have become poorly run. They have benefitted from an enormous bull market and so bad or wasteful behavior has been ex post facto rationalized as correct or inconsequential. In this time, the cost of keeping an alleged harasser on the payroll is nearly infinite. A good recession will clean house.

Maybe it’s just me, but I get the impression from these articles that Google et al. has been an auspicious hidey hole for well-pedigreed sexual deviants.

munificent• 8 years ago

Bias up front: I work at Google. I obviously don't speak for the company here.

We are definitely hearing a lot about this stuff from Google and other tech companies lately. I don't know what we can reliably infer from the absence of that kind of news what that says about other industries.

My intuition is that workplace sexual harassment has been rife in all aspects of human endeavor since the dawn of time. The "boss screwing the secretary" trope isn't exactly a new one. It may be that we're seeing a combination of things:

1. Thanks to the #metoo movement, people who get harassed now have enough power to actually be able to stand up and cause the person they accuse to face some scrutiny. Before, it was just swept under the rug. "Boys will be boys", "that's what you get for dressing like that", "you should have known better to stay late at work with him", etc.

2. The very rapid rise of tech as a cultural dominator makes them a prime actor in our moral narratives. The average person sees a handful of giant tech companies dramatically changing the way we all live, and they naturally want to know if they are a force for good or evil. Those kinds of journalistic narratives sell.

For all we know, sexual harassment could be 10x worse in the insurance industry but we won't know because who wants to read articles about the insurance industry?

3. There's also the obvious bias that if something happens too much, it ceases to be news. "Newsworthiness" is a combination of significance and novelty. The former is where good investigative journalism can show the scope of a sweeping hidden problem. The latter is the old "dog bites man" isn't news but "man bites dog" is. It's easy to mistake the latter for the former and assume that something being reported indicates a trend, when really it indicates the exact opposite.

So, it may be that things really are worse at Google than at other places, but I don't know if we can rely on the presence of news articles to judge that.

rayiner5• 8 years ago

These are all good points. Certainly, there are tons of examples of sexual harassment in other industries. I'll submit, however, that tech is a bit outside the mainstream on this. While sexual harassment happens for example at law firms, nobody in the legal profession (and I suspect, most of "sanitized corporate America") would try to defend with a straight face the practice of relationships between supervisors and underlings, as is typical here on HN.

Viliam1234• 8 years ago

"dog bites man" isn't news but "man bites dog" is.

That would imply that "jocks have sex" isn't news but "nerds have sex" is. Heh.

But there were also news about jocks having sex... so perhaps the rule governing the sexual harassment coverage in news is instead: "sex sells".

Writing stories about sexual harassment, especially colorful stories with lots of details, is simply a way to write about sex (and for the readers to read about sex) with plausible deniability. "No, I am NOT writing/reading these juicy stories as a form of porn; how dare you suggest that?! We are fighters against patriarchy, and we need to know every technical detail about how this agent of patriarchy misbehaved."

Edmond• 8 years ago

I think you can extend to most technology, they are generally poorly run enterprises. When money comes easy as is currently the case, bad leadership is not as obvious to recognize.

dang• 8 years ago

Url changed from https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/30/18045230/alphabet-google..., which points to this.

Executive accused of harassment at Alphabet 'X' unit is out

Related Stories