Report: Google paid Andy Rubin $90 Million after he allegedly coerced sex from employee | Google rewards Sexual Misconduct?

[AlTech]

Google paid Andy Rubin $90 Million after he allegedly coerced sex from an employee.

 

And they had full knowledge of the scandal.

 

According to a report from the New York Times, this isn't the first time Google has done this and they continually have offered enormous sums of money to those who have commited sexual misconduct and subsequently left Google.

 

Quote

A report from The New York Times today has revealed new, alarming details on the circumstances that surrounded Andy Rubin’s departure from Google in 2014. The man often referred to as “the father of Android,” who is currently the chief executive officer of Essential, was asked to resign from Google by Larry Page, according to the Times.

The company had investigated sexual misconduct claims against Rubin, which revolved around an incident in which he allegedly coerced another Google employee into “performing oral sex in a hotel room in 2013.” Despite reportedly finding the claims credible — to the point that Page decided Rubin needed to go — Google gave him a $90 million exit package. The last $2 million of that agreement will be paid out next month.

 

Quote

According to the report, Google was under no obligation to offer such an enormous sum to Rubin or any of the other executives that the Times says received separation agreements after leaving the company over sexual misconduct allegations. They could’ve all been fired, but were instead protected by the company and given millions. In Rubin’s case, the deal prevented him from working for any of the company’s rivals or publicly disparaging Google.

In a statement, Google responded to the Times’ questioning over the numerous cases by saying “we investigate and take action, including termination. In recent years, we’ve taken a particularly hard line on inappropriate conduct by people in positions of authority. We’re working hard to keep improving how we handle this type of behavior.”

 

If this turns out to be the case then I am very dissapointed in Google as no company should condone let alone reward executives for behaving in this manner.

 

Source: https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/25/18023364/google-andy-rubin-payoff-90-million-sexual-misconduct-harassment

[hestolemydog]

What in the f**k? Boycott much?

[Syntaxvgm]

Yet they and other tech giants will continue to position themselves as the morality police of the internet. 

[Dedayog]

Very disappointed.  Ooh, such strong language.  Such a strong stance you're taking!  jk

 

It's alleged.  That explains it all.

[DrMacintosh]

Stay classy 

[WereCatf]

This is nothing new or surprising, if you've ever paid any attention at all to how things are done in the corporate-world; if you've ever held any sort of a senior-position in the company and are rich, you'll basically get paid even more if you do something stupid.

[DrMacintosh]

Just now, jstudrawa said:

It's alleged.  That explains it all.

What is “it’s” refering to here? Because most of the story is not alleged. 

[bellabichon]

2 minutes ago, hestolemydog said:

What in the f**k? Boycott much?

Oh yeah. Lemme just boycott my phone, wifi router, web browser, email, maps, Pokemon GO, etc. It's really not feasible. 

[mr moose]

People are forgetting that just because he had a sexual encounter does not mean he broke the law or enough company policy to legitimize sacking him.  But for the sake of PR they had to do something.  In the corporate world (in fact any world with contracts on that scale) you have to either proved illegal misconduct which undermines the contract or you have to pay them to go.   It is actually the foundation of innocent until proven guilty and people should be supporting it not crucifying them for it.

 

 

[AlTech]

2 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

What is “it’s” refering to here? Because most of the story is not alleged. 

The allegations regarding the misconduct.

[SolarNova]

You know, just becouse 2 people hook up, even for a 1 night stand, happen to be working at the same place, doenst make it bad. FFS its just a job , who gives a flying fk if they work in the same place.

[Dedayog]

1 minute ago, DrMacintosh said:

What is “it’s” refering to here? Because most of the story is not alleged. 

It's in the title of the story, and he hasn't been convicted.  That's what alleged means.  It doesn;'t mean he did it, or he didn't.  It simply means he didn't get convicted (yet).

 

If he hasn't been convicted of a crime, he's not a criminal and hasn't legally committed criminal behavior, so this cannot be a reward for criminal behavior.

 

Also, the payment and the alleged crime are unrelated.  His payment is part of a separation agreement already in his employment contract, not a "reward" for fucking an employee, coerced or not.

 

It's a sensationalist headline and it worked.  It's not a reward. 

[WereCatf]

1 minute ago, SolarNova said:

You know, just becouse 2 people hook up, even for a 1 night stand, happen to be working at the same place, doenst make it bad. FFS its just a job , who gives a flying fk if they work in the same place.

Are you aware of what "coercion" means?

[DrMacintosh]

4 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

The allegations regarding the misconduct.

But we know there was a passoff, so there was enough for Google to stand on. 

 

Would like to hear the women’s position. 

[Dedayog]

Just now, SolarNova said:

You know, just becouse 2 people hook up, even for a 1 night stand, happen to be working at the same place, doenst make it bad. FFS its just a job , who gives a flying fk if they work in the same place.

While you may not be susceptible, there are a lot of people who will make decisions in a company based on the ass they're getting.  One reason.

 

This is another.

 

There are a few more you can probably figure out too.

[SolarNova]

20 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Are you aware of what "coercion" means?

I am , but let me put this forward for your thought.

 

You/people demonize a person who is said to have coerced another into a sexual encounter. You/people thus sympathize with the 'victim'.

 

Now think of this. A person chooses to comply with a sexual encounter, becouse they beleve their job is on the line or that their position within a job will improve, or atleast not get worse.

Therefor they value their job over their own dignity, respect, and pride, they value their job over themsleves.

Then after the fact, that person brings up the event, and the 'coercer' is then domonized in the media, in public. Perhaps the the 'victim' is then compensated (in some way, be it monetary ,positioning within a job, or socialy). Do you think that person, that 'victim' , who made a choice of job over themselves, is thinking of their own morality, their own dignity, pride... or perhaps similarly to their reason for choosing their job over themselves, are they thinking of money, of their position. ?

 

Food for thought.

[Deus Voltage]

6 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

I am , but let me put this forward for your thought.

 

You/people demonize a person who is said to have coerced another into a sexual encounter. You/people thus sympathize with the 'victim'.

 

Now think of this. A person chooses to comply with a sexual encounter, becouse they beleve their job is on the line or that their position within a job will improve, or atleast not get worse.

Therefor they value their job over their own dignity, respect, and pride, they value their job over themsleves.

Then after the fact, that person brings up the event, and the 'coercer' is then domonized in the media, in public. Perhaps the the 'victim' is then compensated (in some way, be it monetary ,positioning within a job, or socialy). Do you think that person, that 'victim' , who made a choice of job over themselves, is thinking of their own morality, their own dignity, pride... or perhaps similarly to their reason for choosing their job over themselves, are they thinking of money, of their position. ?

 

Food for thought.

Coercion: blackmail (which comes in different forms).

 

Blackmail of any form has no place in a civilized society. It weakens the cohesiveness of groups and renders those who are weakest more susceptible to commit self inflicted harm and isolate themselves.

 

So I highly disagree with your thesis, not necessary from a "victim/ criminal" vector of analysis, but from a pragmatic vantage point. 

[WereCatf]

13 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

Therefor they value their job over their own dignity, respect, and pride, they value their job over themsleves.

Not everyone can afford to lose their job. Also, it does in no way or form mean that they value "their job over themsleves" -- some people are, by their nature, easier to push around, especially by authority-figures, and there are things like depression or other mental issues that can very much have an effect, too.

[mr moose]

14 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

I am , but let me put this forward for your thought.

 

You/people demonize a person who is said to have coerced another into a sexual encounter. You/people thus sympathize with the 'victim'.

 

Now think of this. A person chooses to comply with a sexual encounter, becouse they beleve their job is on the line or that their position within a job will improve, or atleast not get worse.

Therefor they value their job over their own dignity, respect, and pride, they value their job over themsleves.

Then after the fact, that person brings up the event, and the 'coercer' is then domonized in the media, in public. Perhaps the the 'victim' is then compensated (in some way, be it monetary ,positioning within a job, or socialy). Do you think that person, that 'victim' , who made a choice of job over themselves, is thinking of their own morality, their own dignity, pride... or perhaps similarly to their reason for choosing their job over themselves, are they thinking of money, of their position. ?

 

Food for thought.

I can come at that if the person has the option to walk away from their job and simply get another one whilst loudly and proudly telling everyone why (even though such claims could result in a defamation case because how do you prove it happened?).  

 

However the issue here is that not everyone has that option and not everyone can defend themselves from legal repercussions which is likely why this guy got $90M to walk away.   With this case being a he said/she said in court, neither party can be garrunteed of justice. Hence why coercion (if provable) is such a no no.

[SolarNova]

Its nice to see polite replies to such a ...volatile... subject

[Guest]

At the end of the day the guy lost his job, and I imagine the $90 mil was like a severance package (please excuse spelling). The woman no longer has to put up with him in her workspace (although I imagine stigma could remain) due to the actions of google. Not to forget $90M is nothing to google. One side of the story however but;

- No court case

- No justice

- More importantly, one side of the story - we cant hear facts and evidence from both sides. 

- Google it seems has taken action into its own hands, rather than proper authorities. 

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

At the end of the day the guy lost his job, and I imagine the $90 mil was like a severance package (please excuse spelling). The woman no longer has to put up with him in her workspace (although I imagine stigma could remain) due to the actions of google. Not to forget $90M is nothing to google. One side of the story however but;

- No court case

- No justice

- More importantly, one side of the story - we cant hear facts and evidence from both sides. 

- Google it seems has taken action into its own hands, rather than proper authorities. 

I agree, although maybe there was an agreement that authorities could do little and the outcome would be the same/worse.  Her workplace (enter my own biases) could be fully supportive of her in a #metoo way. 

[Canada EH]

1 hour ago, AluminiumTech said:

Andy Rubin $90 Million

Nope, that was just his bonus, they did not pay him to coerce non mutual sex, the money was a bonus.

 

Its common practice in big business to pay large bonuses and salaries no matter if they do great or make the company bankrupt.

[AnonymousGuy]

What's disgusting is that a separation package is that large in the first place.  I wouldn't care if Jesus was offering to work for my company, that fucker ain't getting 90 million dollars to join, cause no single person is going to create that much value.

 

"father of android".  Yeah and android 1.0 looks like dog shit compared to what you have today after a billion man-hours developing it.

[RejZoR]

Remember, the ones who scream the most accusing others of being rapists turn out to be the biggest creeps themselves. I've seen so many of these progressive "believe all women" creeps during GamerGate thing...