hold on someone was distributing stuff at work was told by HR to stop doing it and then kept putting up flyers and using work resources for political stuff and got fired?
However, the articles phrasing is employee used work resources to notify colleges that their work may causing legal risk for the business. Which uh seems pretty fine?
But also, the laws of a country Trump whatever policies your company has.
Ratified international treaties are the supreme law of the land in the US, and the whistleblower protection stuff being invoked is claimed to be from retaliation to a crime allegation.
Firing someone for trying to stop the company from engaging in violations of international law (not to mention basic human values), is increasingly looking untenable.
So wait, there's this organization called Foxglove that has been "supporting" (financially? They certainly seem to have means) an employee that started distributing flyers and ... against Google by linking them to conflicts. Now they're supporting said employee suing Google?
I mean, obviously they created this situation from the start ... why?
Companies should not be surprised when they hire employees who behave exactly like they said they would.
It was Google's own code of ethics that stated that they had a ban on building AI weapons. They dropped it:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy081nqx2zjo
It was Google who claimed to be something and ultimately rug pulled a very important promise.
hold on someone was distributing stuff at work was told by HR to stop doing it and then kept putting up flyers and using work resources for political stuff and got fired?
I mean if you phrase it like that.
However, the articles phrasing is employee used work resources to notify colleges that their work may causing legal risk for the business. Which uh seems pretty fine?
But also, the laws of a country Trump whatever policies your company has.
Ratified international treaties are the supreme law of the land in the US, and the whistleblower protection stuff being invoked is claimed to be from retaliation to a crime allegation.
Working with Israel is going to ultimately be a liability. Microsoft fired it's head of Israel division for helping Israel conduct mass survilence:
https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/microsoft-fires-head...
Firing someone for trying to stop the company from engaging in violations of international law (not to mention basic human values), is increasingly looking untenable.
> engaging in violations of international law (not to mention basic human values)
good thing it's not happening
Of course it is, and it's very well documented.
So wait, there's this organization called Foxglove that has been "supporting" (financially? They certainly seem to have means) an employee that started distributing flyers and ... against Google by linking them to conflicts. Now they're supporting said employee suing Google?
I mean, obviously they created this situation from the start ... why?
[flagged]