this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
550 points (98.1% liked)
Technology
59446 readers
4587 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Discussing politics at the work place has been an HR violation for some time, but speaking against the company policy or its customers has always been a fireable ofense. I’m not sure why this surprises anyone.
Sure, google is an evil corporation and there’s lots of reasons to hate them, but why are we focusing on this specific thing which is common across all workplaces?
And yes, if you find out your employer is constructing concentration camps and you openly speak against that, you’re probably going to lose your job. Why is this even a question?
It's just a Tuesday in the Capitalist Hellscape © of U.S.A.™
Lol you're getting tossed in jail doing this in a communist society...this isn't about capitalism at all. It's about keeping people from creating a hostile work environment, look how polarized politics is online, shit gets heated in a work setting? It's a no go for any sane company wanting to keep the peace between employees.
Just because communism also sucks does not mean that capitalism has not ruined our lives.
No one said it hasn't helped it some, but until you have magical replicators like in star trek, people will still be people. You cannot stop human nature to want more.
Seems to me that the problem is bankers. Not the average Joe
If the employees owned the firm, then no they are not.
Authoritarian Communism? Yup, it sucks too and I'd call that out.
There isn't anything stopping workers now from creating employee own companies. They exist today.
I think maybe you're conflating capitalism and politics.
The need for workers to voice out against company policies and actions often necessary for safety of workers, customers, etc. This is required for capitalism to work to any standard.
Its not hard to see how firing employees for noting safety problems can cause problems. The obvious case for this is Boeing where they started punishing people for doing basic quality control work.
Where did I say people aren't allowed to speak out against company policies and practices?
Looks like a navel-gazing USA thing. Here in Europe I cannot imagine that there's many companies who'd fire workers for protesting or tells them to shut up forever.
Here in Sweden, firing an employee for giving an opinion on company policy is illegal. Just look at the Tesla union wars.
That's not actually true. Even in Sweden, employees can be fired for misconduct and what constitutes misconduct is a complex matter. But more importantly, in the Tesla case, those employees are on strike which is a different issue.
They can be fired for misconduct, yes, What makes you think protests or giving opinons on work related mtter, possibly supoorted by a union, would be interpreted as "misconduct"? Can you give an example of a case like that where misconduct was having an issue with selling products to war criminals or similar?
Publicly labeling customers as "war criminals" is misconduct and will get you fired anywhere in the world, yes. Stop pretending you misunderstand this simple fact.
Can you show that in Sweden?
If not maybe you could stop pretending to misunderstand a simple fact.
That's stupid. How can I show you an instance of someone talking against a customer publicly is Sweden? Calming that employees cannot get fired for damaging the business in any country is completely false. Thinking that the situation in Sweden with Tesla is similar to what happened in Google is completely ignorant.
I understand simple facts extremely well. The problem is that you're trying to make this situation into something it isn't
Can you give me the exact law that says this would be the case in Sweden?
These are the government guidelines.
You should be more careful on how you let information reach you. You have to be pretty ignorant to think that there exists a country which doesn’t allow business to fire employees.
So yes, again we agree, there is a law of misconduct. Can you demonstrate any reasonable example where an employer in Sweden was fired on such grounds because they protest peacefully against their own company making an unethical deal with a questionable government or the like?
Also your tone is just shit.
Can you show me an instance where a Swedish employee did what you claim? I showed you that it is within the legal framework. That should be enough.
We both agree that misconduct is a thing. We disageew on what miscobduct means. I hope that makes it clear.
Have you read that article btw?
I am not sure what exactly you are asking me to show.... in Sweden (as said in the link you posted and as I already know by actually working in Sweden for years) is that you have to warn workers of msiconduct and they can appeal your decision if it's dumb as fuck (like what Google did). Do you have any reason at all to believe that workers in Sweden would be fired in a similar way? I don'y think so. This shit does not happen here, and there are mechanisms that give employees and unions power to stop it.
Like read this shit:
so do you have any case whatsoever that shows that this shit would fly at a Swedish company? One where it was legally challenged at least? If no, then what exactly is your point?
PS: sorry can't be bothered to fix spelling lol. Your tone was so crap that it even put me off trying to explain my point. You cannot fire people in Sweden for doing whay those employees at Google did.
The fact that I don't have an example doesn't mean that it can't happen. It just means that it hasn't yet or that I don't know of it. Just because you can't show me an example of an atom bomb attack in Sweden or of me getting punched in the face in 2024 does not mean that these things can't happen, does it? This whole thread started with people saying that this can't happen in Europe. It absolutely can. And having worked in various corporations across Europe (though not Sweden specifically), I can tell you that they all have clauses in the work contract saying that you can be fired for conduct while representing the company, especially for conduct in relation to customers. So if Google employees would block the headquarters in Stockholm to convince the company to stop trading with Israel because it's a genocidal state, I guarantee you they'd not be safe from disciplinary measures including termination.
I want to say I understand your point. You sre saying misconduct laws are vague and that allows employers to fire employees for BS. You also seem to think those Google employees committed some kind of 'misconduct'. I disagree.
The issue in my opinion is that you are basing it on the law sounding vague... and ignoring the part where employees would receive warnings that first and foremost makes it clear to them that such a thing is regarded as misconduct and could lead to.termination... and you are ignoring that in is able to appeal the decision with the help of a union representative. Then you are ignoring all free speech laws and the fact that this is not a common culture or occurrence in Sqeden .
I work in Sweden and have read the law a million times. I also raised problems at work and challenged authority and was never fired nor sent to HR or anything like that. There are laws in Sweden that act as a safety net to prevent employers from firing a person for such trivial shit. Has this ever happened? If no one seems to interpret this as misconduct in Sweden, then where is your claim coming from?
So allow me to rephrase the question to you in a more civil way: aside from the "law being vague", do you have reason(s) to believe that staging a sitdown as protest in Sweden or having coffee and a chat with people staging a reasonable peaceful and coordinated protest in Swede would get you fired?
This may be the case for some European countries (I have no idea and won't speak our of my asa about places I don't know much about) but not Sweden. If you never worked here, then you may not understand how Swedish law and unions work exactly with cases like this. I am quite thankful to live in this kind of society where my employer cannot fire me just because they would rather fund the literal mutilation of thousands of children and be complicit in international human rights violations.
And for the example you cited: as someone who has worked in Stockholm specifically and works there now: no, that would not be grounds to fire you, and you can appeal by law and get help from your union representative.
If you are unaware of Swedish law, I would advice that you avoid generalizing European laws to Sweden
I feel we need to discuss this first, because I completely disagree with you:
Free speech has nothing to do with this situation. Nothing guarantees you there will be no consequences if you use your place of business for personal agenda. That's not what free speech is about.
I'm sorry, but you're misclassifying the situation. Abusively occupying an office is not peaceful or reasonable. It is an attention forcing action and it can have consequences. They weren't arrested for their views on the genocidal Israel state, they were arrested for being in a place they're not legally allowed to be in. And they weren't fired for their views on Israel, they were fired for criticising a company customer from the position of an employee
I think you misread Swedish law and are (on purpose?) misreading what happened at Google. I have nothing more to say other than the above in my previous comments. Have a nice day.
You should be aware of the fact that Google & the others have offices in Europe and they have the same policy here too. These type of policies fit well within the legal framework in most EU countries. And I guarantee that people would get fired over protests disrupting the workplace if found unwarranted.
In your shithole country, maybe.
Oh, please, enlighten me. In what country do you think you're allowed to violate company policy?
Even if we ignore what @prole wrote, in civilized countries you're allowed to break company policy if it infringes your rights, regardless of what a contract says.
No country guarantees you the right to openly discuss politics in the workplace though.
Lol did you already forget what you said? Or did your original comment actually say, "Violating company policy at the work place has been an HR violation for some time..." Because yeah, no shit. Somehow I don't think that's what you were going for...
Did you purposefully completely change the topic, or was that some kind of "sly" attempt to pivot? Shit is real weird.
Maybe you were about to ask the actual logical follow-up question of, "In what country do you think you're allowed to discuss politics at work?" before doing a quick google search and realizing you'd make yourself look even stupider.
As if the entire conversation wasn't about whether or not something should be allowed to be a company's policy. Not whether or not employees should be able to break their work's HR policy. Do you not see the distinction here?
You must be very confused. I did not forget anything. I'm simply making the claim that your impression that this happens only in my "shitty" country is wrong and if you tell me what country you live in, I can give you multiple examples of it happening there too. You're probably misinformed or ignorant of the law if you think it doesn't.
"A company should not be able to make X part of their policy."
That's you. If only there was a word for this... Shmallacy?
The actual question would be,
Maybe I'm giving you too much credit, but I feel like you knew this and realize how stupid you sounded. The better thing to do would probably just have been to quietly exit the conversation.
By the way, check usernames, I just entered this thread.
Wow, you're one of those annoying idiots who think being aggressive makes them right. Good thing this platform has an "block" feature
Aggressive? Uh what?
Not being able to discuss politics at work is not really the case for everyone though, it's worker politics that aren't allowed, if the politics agree with the owner class they'll set up a PAC for it. Whoever heard of an executive or board member fired for discussing politics that paint the organization in a positive light? I also think it's worth pointing out most companies would fire for this and are authoritative in structure and don't allow for democratic practices like elections, petitioning, protesting, etc. Just because it's that way now doesn't mean it always will be with good labor protections.
Why is this a surprise to us? We had faith in humanity.
And is it really common in all workplaces?