<story><title>Four fired workers file charges against Google</title><url>https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/dec/03/google-is-no-longer-listening-four-fired-workers-file-charges-against-tech-giant</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>vlovich123</author><text>As someone who worked at Google I&amp;#x27;d like to clarify this corporate speak &amp;amp; I&amp;#x27;m really disappointed as I thought Google had higher standards.&lt;p&gt;Google has traditionally embraced an open culture so accessing documents outside the scope of your job has traditionally been totally fine &amp;amp; is the stated reason why every full time employee is considered an insider for trading purposes, with legal restrictions imposed on when you can trade.&lt;p&gt;&amp;#x27;m guessing from memory (&amp;amp; this would be from before my time so ex-Googlers with a better memory please remind me), but the data policy was introduced to deal with SREs looking at customer data they weren&amp;#x27;t supposed to, not about the work product of coworkers.&lt;p&gt;In terms of people&amp;#x27;s calendars I&amp;#x27;m totally confused - it&amp;#x27;s super-easy to change sharing permissions even on a per event level. Sounds like it&amp;#x27;s a pretext - the reasonable approach would be A) Improve training about the available privacy settings B) Improve Google Calendar to make it easier to manage those privacy settings since I&amp;#x27;m sure other workplaces have a similar problem.&lt;p&gt;So the calendar stalking is the bigger problem I think on the part of the fired employees but the &amp;quot;accessing documents outside the scope of their jobs&amp;quot; is total BS. The leaking &amp;quot;sensitive business or customer information&amp;quot; seems like pure FUD - seems like a lawyer-approved way to slander about what happened.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m really curious whose calendars were accessed &amp;quot;inappropriately&amp;quot; and who reported feeling threatened. Moreover just accessing a calendar is not something you&amp;#x27;re notified about so that would indicate this is either BS on Google&amp;#x27;s part or these people were doing a bit of active stalking on the side. Could come out that everyone is the asshole in this story but given how bad management&amp;#x2F;labor relations have gone under Sundar, I&amp;#x27;d wager that Google is definitely engaging in really shady shit on their own here.</text></item><item><author>6gvONxR4sf7o</author><text>I figure others would be curious about Google&amp;#x27;s side of it. Who is right or wrong doesn&amp;#x27;t seem obvious to me. Apparently this is a memo about why these workers were fired[0]:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; We’ve seen a recent increase in information being shared outside the company, including the names and details of our employees. Our teams are committed to investigating these issues, and today we’ve dismissed four employees for clear and repeated violations of our data security policies.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; There’s been some misinformation circulating about this investigation, both internally and externally. We want to be clear that none of these individuals were fired for simply looking at documents or calendars during the ordinary course of their work.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; To the contrary, our thorough investigation found the individuals were involved in systematic searches for other employees’ materials and work. This includes searching for, accessing, and distributing business information outside the scope of their jobs — repeating this conduct even after they were met with and reminded about our data security policies. This information, along with details of internal emails and inaccurate descriptions about Googlers’ work, was subsequently shared externally.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; In one case, among other information they accessed and copied, an individual subscribed to the calendars of a wide range of employees outside of their work group. The individual set up notifications so that they received emails detailing the work and whereabouts of those employees, including personal matters such as 1:1s, medical appointments and family activities — all without those employees’ knowledge or consent. When the affected Googlers discovered this, many reported that they felt scared or unsafe, and requested to work from another location. Screenshots of some of their calendars, including their names and details, subsequently made their way outside the company.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; We have always taken information security very seriously, and will not tolerate efforts to intimidate Googlers or undermine their work, nor actions that lead to the leak of sensitive business or customer information. This is not how Google’s open culture works or was ever intended to work. We expect every member of our community to abide by our data security policies.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Fortunately, these types of activities are rare. Thank you to everyone who does the right thing every day — doing amazing work, while inspiring and maintaining the trust of our users, partners, and each other.&lt;p&gt;[0] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.bloomberg.com&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;articles&amp;#x2F;2019-11-25&amp;#x2F;google-fires-four-employees-citing-data-security-violations&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.bloomberg.com&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;articles&amp;#x2F;2019-11-25&amp;#x2F;google-fi...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jartelt</author><text>Earlier this year Google e-mailed all employees and noted that accessing docs outside the scope of your job responsibility is forbidden and a fire-able offense. I think this policy change marked the end of the open culture you speak of.&lt;p&gt;Whether this was a legitimate policy change or a change simply made to find reasons to fire activists, I don&amp;#x27;t know. But, it was made clear many months ago that digging around to access docs outside your spec could result in a firing.</text></comment>
<story><title>Four fired workers file charges against Google</title><url>https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/dec/03/google-is-no-longer-listening-four-fired-workers-file-charges-against-tech-giant</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>vlovich123</author><text>As someone who worked at Google I&amp;#x27;d like to clarify this corporate speak &amp;amp; I&amp;#x27;m really disappointed as I thought Google had higher standards.&lt;p&gt;Google has traditionally embraced an open culture so accessing documents outside the scope of your job has traditionally been totally fine &amp;amp; is the stated reason why every full time employee is considered an insider for trading purposes, with legal restrictions imposed on when you can trade.&lt;p&gt;&amp;#x27;m guessing from memory (&amp;amp; this would be from before my time so ex-Googlers with a better memory please remind me), but the data policy was introduced to deal with SREs looking at customer data they weren&amp;#x27;t supposed to, not about the work product of coworkers.&lt;p&gt;In terms of people&amp;#x27;s calendars I&amp;#x27;m totally confused - it&amp;#x27;s super-easy to change sharing permissions even on a per event level. Sounds like it&amp;#x27;s a pretext - the reasonable approach would be A) Improve training about the available privacy settings B) Improve Google Calendar to make it easier to manage those privacy settings since I&amp;#x27;m sure other workplaces have a similar problem.&lt;p&gt;So the calendar stalking is the bigger problem I think on the part of the fired employees but the &amp;quot;accessing documents outside the scope of their jobs&amp;quot; is total BS. The leaking &amp;quot;sensitive business or customer information&amp;quot; seems like pure FUD - seems like a lawyer-approved way to slander about what happened.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m really curious whose calendars were accessed &amp;quot;inappropriately&amp;quot; and who reported feeling threatened. Moreover just accessing a calendar is not something you&amp;#x27;re notified about so that would indicate this is either BS on Google&amp;#x27;s part or these people were doing a bit of active stalking on the side. Could come out that everyone is the asshole in this story but given how bad management&amp;#x2F;labor relations have gone under Sundar, I&amp;#x27;d wager that Google is definitely engaging in really shady shit on their own here.</text></item><item><author>6gvONxR4sf7o</author><text>I figure others would be curious about Google&amp;#x27;s side of it. Who is right or wrong doesn&amp;#x27;t seem obvious to me. Apparently this is a memo about why these workers were fired[0]:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; We’ve seen a recent increase in information being shared outside the company, including the names and details of our employees. Our teams are committed to investigating these issues, and today we’ve dismissed four employees for clear and repeated violations of our data security policies.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; There’s been some misinformation circulating about this investigation, both internally and externally. We want to be clear that none of these individuals were fired for simply looking at documents or calendars during the ordinary course of their work.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; To the contrary, our thorough investigation found the individuals were involved in systematic searches for other employees’ materials and work. This includes searching for, accessing, and distributing business information outside the scope of their jobs — repeating this conduct even after they were met with and reminded about our data security policies. This information, along with details of internal emails and inaccurate descriptions about Googlers’ work, was subsequently shared externally.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; In one case, among other information they accessed and copied, an individual subscribed to the calendars of a wide range of employees outside of their work group. The individual set up notifications so that they received emails detailing the work and whereabouts of those employees, including personal matters such as 1:1s, medical appointments and family activities — all without those employees’ knowledge or consent. When the affected Googlers discovered this, many reported that they felt scared or unsafe, and requested to work from another location. Screenshots of some of their calendars, including their names and details, subsequently made their way outside the company.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; We have always taken information security very seriously, and will not tolerate efforts to intimidate Googlers or undermine their work, nor actions that lead to the leak of sensitive business or customer information. This is not how Google’s open culture works or was ever intended to work. We expect every member of our community to abide by our data security policies.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Fortunately, these types of activities are rare. Thank you to everyone who does the right thing every day — doing amazing work, while inspiring and maintaining the trust of our users, partners, and each other.&lt;p&gt;[0] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.bloomberg.com&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;articles&amp;#x2F;2019-11-25&amp;#x2F;google-fires-four-employees-citing-data-security-violations&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.bloomberg.com&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;articles&amp;#x2F;2019-11-25&amp;#x2F;google-fi...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>shadowgovt</author><text>The restriction on viewing and disseminating internal corporate information (not user PII, but design documents and plans) outside of one&amp;#x27;s field of responsibility is new, and there was wide concern internally that it looked like setup for this type of &amp;quot;you don&amp;#x27;t agree with another team and are throwing same in the wheels by adding inconvenient questions; get fired&amp;quot; arrangement.</text></comment>