This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Hrolf The Ganger 08 Aug 17 11.37am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
It is no surprise who the OP is here, a man on a mission. The HOL response is surprising. It's a free market so the guy should have joined another company if he doesn't like the Google ethos. From what little I have read the memo is dodgy pseudo science. He or she hasn't read their John Stuart Mill. Attacking the company goes against his (or her) contract and naturally led to the sack. End of. Oh really? You are being deliberately obtuse if you claim not to see what is happening here. Just remember this kind of policy is easily dismissed until you become the target.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 08 Aug 17 12.06pm | |
---|---|
I wasn't aware that engineers were involved in hiring policies. Now whilst he might have a point, I'm not really sure that most companies want to get into a public argument about their employment practices and initiatives - with their own employee(s). I don't like the idea of 'diversity hires' but I understand the logic behind them, and the necessity based on social research. I don't like the idea of restricting what people can and cannot say at work, but I do understand that it can be reasonable, when your the company that faces the law suit for hostile work environments - and I do find it a bit strange that people would have to be concerned about the language use and what they say in a professional work environment that might be causing offence to people (I generally don't talk about race, religion, politics, gender at work anyhow, unless someone broaches the subject).
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Jimenez SELHURSTPARKCHESTER,DA BRONX 08 Aug 17 2.01pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
It is no surprise who the OP is here, a man on a mission. The HOL response is surprising. It's a free market so the guy should have joined another company if he doesn't like the Google ethos. From what little I have read the memo is dodgy pseudo science. He or she hasn't read their John Stuart Mill. Attacking the company goes against his (or her) contract and naturally led to the sack. End of. Aha so the boots on the other foot now. I can recall the times when you weren't hired unless you joined the union. Most of the union reps were well union reps because they weren't up to the job anyway.
Pro USA & Israel |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 08 Aug 17 3.14pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by wordup
America is certainly a country of contrasts and extremes when it comes to the workplace and society. You have progressives shouting down a man who clearly at least has a point - in my view this type of job does tend to appeal more to men. Then on the other hand, you have a president gunning to kick out patriots serving their country because he decides out of nowhere that they're now unable to do a job they've been doing fine for years.
As for specific jobs appealing to men, I think men have said this about every job that's ever been. We have women (and trans people) serving in front line combat these days, so I think a little software engineering would appeal to at least some women in the population. Edited by Ray in Houston (08 Aug 2017 3.16pm)
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 08 Aug 17 3.19pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
As for specific jobs appealing to men, I think men have said this about every job that's ever been. We have women (and trans people) serving in front line combat these days, so I think a little software engineering would appeal to at least some women in the population. Did they have to lower the physical standards for women to serve in the front line? I weigh 260 pounds of mostly muscle. If I needed carrying or dragging to safety I'd expect a women fighting on the front line to be physically able to do it. Otherwise....if that isn't the case....then what has happened has nothing to do with equality.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Kermit8 Hevon 08 Aug 17 3.22pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Did they have to lower the physical standards for women to serve in the front line? I weigh 260 pounds of mostly muscle. If I needed carrying or dragging to safety I'd expect a women fighting on the front line to be physically able to do it. Otherwise....if that isn't the case....then what has happened has nothing to do with equality. You are 19stone of mostly muscle? At your age? You are taking the piss............down to the GP to get it tested.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 08 Aug 17 3.28pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Did they have to lower the physical standards for women to serve in the front line? I weigh 260 pounds of mostly muscle. If I needed carrying or dragging to safety I'd expect a women fighting on the front line to be physically able to do it. Otherwise....if that isn't the case....then what has happened has nothing to do with equality. I weigh 250lbs. Pull ups are a bitch.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 08 Aug 17 3.29pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
I weigh 250lbs. Pull ups are a bitch. Oorah!
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 08 Aug 17 3.30pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Kermit8
You are 19stone of mostly muscle? At your age? You are taking the piss............down to the GP to get it tested. It's mostly muscle in the same way you're mostly Scottish.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Kermit8 Hevon 08 Aug 17 3.36pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
It's mostly muscle in the same way you're mostly Scottish. 50% has never been mostly. I do hope you are not teaching maths. And ffs cut down the junk food and sugar. Don't want any RIP Stirling threads just yet.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 08 Aug 17 3.39pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Kermit8
50% has never been mostly. I do hope you are not teaching maths. And ffs cut down the junk food and sugar. Don't want any RIP Stirling threads just yet. I thank you....good to see you back here by the way....nice to have something to rant about.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
wordup 08 Aug 17 3.46pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
I wasn't aware that engineers were involved in hiring policies. Now whilst he might have a point, I'm not really sure that most companies want to get into a public argument about their employment practices and initiatives - with their own employee(s). I don't like the idea of 'diversity hires' but I understand the logic behind them, and the necessity based on social research. I don't like the idea of restricting what people can and cannot say at work, but I do understand that it can be reasonable, when your the company that faces the law suit for hostile work environments - and I do find it a bit strange that people would have to be concerned about the language use and what they say in a professional work environment that might be causing offence to people (I generally don't talk about race, religion, politics, gender at work anyhow, unless someone broaches the subject). Firing the guy was way over the top. He didn't go on an angry rant, it was a considered view. I guess from Google's pov the traction this manifesto got doesn't align with how people perceive the company. They care about their bottom line above all else and don't want constant public debates about managerial policies started by any tom, dick or harry within the company so tried to shut this down. The only way to prove them wrong is to stop using their products. It's worth mentioning that 'Political affiliations or activities' is a protected class in California and so I expect this guy to take legal action and wouldn't blame him if he did.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.