What if Bill Gates had been worried about an inappropriate "power dynamic" when he asked his employee Melinda to go out with him? He'd probably be a lonely old man and Melinda would be a mid grade executive.
69
Mr Rubin is such a handsome man, it’s difficult to believe such a dreamboat would have to coerce any woman...
51
If you have a consensual affair, you are on your own.this is a ridiculous story.
56
Technically Steve Jobs is the real “Father of Android”
13
Am I reading this right? You and your mother meet a prospective employer at “Burning Man” for a serious job interview.
No words!
It seems like people have no spine and all common sense goes out the window When a job is on the line.
46
@WMA And who takes their mother to Burning Man?! Burning Man is past it and trite now, but still...
18
Having a consensual extramarital affair with a powerful man creates a shady situation that may have power dynamics. This is obvious. Is google supposed to police personal lives and personal problems that occur away from work?
Are the allegations true?
Google washed their hands of this guy, but paid him for his work, which will continue to give them profits. Doesn’t seem so strange.
38
I went to a tech/entrepreneur conference that Eric Schmidt attended. He walked in to a talk given by Esther Perel, of all people, with two very young, very scantily dressed women on each arm. He sat down in the row in front of me with no shame whatsoever. In fact he was beaming. The grownups in my aisle looked askance and cringed. Google does no evil? But what do its executives do?
42
Hey Google, How's the "Don't be Evil" motto working out?
40
Look how surprised I am: None. I am none surprised.
19
This is the essence of corporate profligacy, widespread, deep and costly to us all.
23
Psst, Google, a clue: Sex between people at different levels in the organization is always a bad idea. "Evil", if you will.
30
So much for "Do No Evil". Sounded good when Sergey and Larry were young and poor. Rich and older: "Show me the Money"
28
DuckDuckGo and Apple look better all the time.
18
Change the amount of money, the names and titles, and the industry, and one will find this story repeated over and over in this country. I experienced much of it and am now 80. Decades later both my daughters lost, or left, great jobs because of serious sexual harassment about which no action was taken.
Until the majority of men decide that they do not own others, nor have the right to control the world in which we live, this will continue. It is not, I repeat, not a case of a few men who act badly. Inappropriate conduct, punishing or ignoring women with ideas that are better than their own, and a host of other forms of mistreatment are daily experiences for most women. Some are mundane, so we shrug and go on. Others are deeply insulting, and we avoid that person if possible. Some are threatening and physically/sexually harmful. But I can guarantee you that if one paid close attention, it would be as rare for a woman to have none of this happen to her daily as it is for people of color to go through a day without experiencing racism. And it is much, much worse for a woman of color than for those of us who are white -- unless we are very poor.
Even my best male friends have left me in tears or very angry at their careless, unaware treatment. There is a price in friendships lost, jobs not taken or lost with the attendant financial losses, and perhaps most of all, the difficulty of trusting half the human race.
122
This article makes a number of points, some valid, others equivocal.
It certainly appears that Google, a publicly held company, overpays some of its executives, and is overly generous in severance packages for high level management.
The sexual harassment charges are harder to evaluate. The major claim against Mr. Rubin is from a woman who had what is likely a consensual extramarital relationship with him, which later went sour. She now accuses him of "coercing" her into oral sex. What does "coerced" oral sex mean? Was he threatening her job? Her claim is said to be credible. What does "credible" mean? That there were no witnesses to the contrary? The allegations against the Duke lacrosse team were credible. Until they weren't.
Mr. Rubin may have had other extramarital affairs. Bill Clinton had many adulterous relationships. These aren't good things, but if consensual are a different category of offense; it takes two to tango.
Women sometimes play what has been called "the sex card." Consider NY Times reporter Ali Watkins, who had a consensual sexual relationship with the married director of security of the Senate Intelligence committee, a man 31 years her senior; Ms. Watkins probably wanted to get stories.
Many, perhaps most, allegations of sexual harassment by men in positions of power are likely straightforward and true. But in some cases, the reality is more complicated. It's hard for the public to tell from the information that makes it to the public media.
25
@Alex it is ALWAYS a problem when a manager has a sexual relationship with a subordinate. The relationship is not equal as the manager wields power over the subordinate 's career. This is why companies have policies against such relationships.
56
@Autumn Flower Actually, I think Alex's points are spot on. When a woman agrees to a consensual sexual relationship with whoever; if the relationship comes to an end in the course of human events, life should move on even when feelings get hurt.
11
Where is the line between journalism and gossip? A woman who is in a consensual relationship, an extra-martial one at that, makes an allegation devoid of proof. And we, the readers, are supposed to what?
How does the NY Times weigh the decision about an allegation? At what point is 'credibility' established? At what point does an allegation without evidence constitute an unwarranted allegation that needlessly tarnishes the good names of the innocent? It is not like the Times, or any other organization, is providing a means by which the accused can prove innocence.
It is equally true that those subjected to sexual misconduct have no valid means of reporting and redress.
Therein lies the rub. Perhaps the Times should focus on writing about why traditional methods of redress are failing? Maybe we could focus on ensuring accountability in a system governed more by lawyers and resources than it is by facts? Why is that?
I daresay trial by public opinion is not an alternative, and it brings out the worst of both sides on this issue - something I had hoped the Kavanaugh trauma would have made clear. We clearly need a better method of adjudication than that!
Its time to focus on the system instead of doxing people in pursuit of ... something?
23
@Eric G "doxing people in pursuit of" bringing information to light regarding deceptive management practices at a publicly-traded company, with annual revenue comprising 0.5% of the US Gross Domestic Product.
While these stories may sound like gossip/innuendo, several of the incidents reported here have been either open secrets, or matters of public record for several years. This is *absolutely* newsworthy.
38
If anything, Rubin should be paying Google—or better yet, the courts and his taxes.
I don't trust iOS, nor Android which is increasingly distancing itself from being free software to being a creepy-Google-service kiosk. Use real free software on a real computer, please.
And search with DuckDuckGo until we can use a trustworthy free-software search engine too.
10
No one is worth $150/90/money-invested-in-new-ventures millions. And buying beach retreats in Japan? This is why we struggle as a country now. Because of these corporate moneybags. Silicon Valley needs to develop a conscience, not another app. But money and power Trump morality. That's our problem
39
It’s just a fact that the current configuration of laws and values in the U.S. favor commerce over people. “Shareholder value” rules. Until we change that, people who are valuable to companies will continue to get big paydays for bad behavior.
21
So Larry Page gives $90 million to Rubin. Larry, how much have you given to your home town scholarship fund for deserving students who needs a break?
36
Google has another reason for paying these men off: omertà. Pay-offs mean they won’t rat out their fellow abusers who haven’t been caught yet.
43
I'm an unabashed consumer fan of Google products. But the leadership at the top of the company that apparently not only condones, but sometimes participates in, the behavior described in this article is indefensible, and has me re-thinking my choices in products and the corporate 'values' embedded in a brand. Truly sickening.
33
I suppose Google removed it's code of conduct motto "Don't be evil" for a reason!
15
In all fairness to google, when I typed "google" today in the search engine this was the first article that popped up.
13
@SridharC Wow. How compelling. Google sounds like a tawdry version of Animal House. Shameful.
14
Separation of the classes continue; both in pay and allowable conduct. Well I’ve got mine; and I did it through being in and supporting my union and voting for Democrats and their support of the National Labor Relations Board. The slow destruction and rejection of unionism, company retirement systems, and non-fiduciary protections of employee IRA purchases in this country is perpetrated by Corporate leadership and Republicans. And now we’re about to lose our Obamacare. I have yet to talk to a Republican voter than can justify voting that way.
26
Jerry, not everything in life is about political tribalism. Google is a very liberal and blue company. There issues have nothing to do with Republicans.
This is a story about ethics and morals and the conduct that happens at Google is a comment on how far our society has slid.
This issue cuts across the aisle. In the last 60 years we’ve had at least four womanizing presidents and three of the four were Democrats, JFK, LBJ, Clinton; the fourth womanizing president, that we know of, occupies the White House currently.
11
The way to make this problem rapidly diminish is to make the SUPERIOR bear the consequences of impermissible behavior rather than punish the junior employee. That can be made clear in both company policies and culture and in employment contracts. Make it explicit, make no exceptions for rank or "importance." If one occupies an exalted position within an organization, at least in some part ~ one could hope for a large part, but.... ~ you are there for your judgment and maturity. If you do not possess those qualities you are not truly a leader deserving of respect or followers.
21
Soon to be a major motion picture. Weinstein will acquire the option.
15
Everyone repeat after me: Google is the enemy.
11
That must be why they removed "Don't be evil" from their code of conduct in 2018.
20
Men protecting men. No surprise there.
35
The wealthy looking out for their own
28
They sacked the guys even without legal proof. Give them credit. And $90 million for the guy who invented Android? Cheap. Think of all the CEOs who get that much each year, just for climbing the corporate ladder!
18
An example of "The Ajax Dilemma." A hero to many software engineers as a technical wizard, but unsatisfied by the professional recognition Google's governance team offered him. Rubin's affair is an example of moral suicide and ethical lapse, a metaphorical equivalence to the act Ajax committed. That he walked with $90M is a thumb in the eye of professional integrity.
9
In every one of these cases, both parties knew the risks they were taking and the negative fallout that may ensue, if exposed, yet all continued with the relationships. Both parties exercised their wiles. Let the consequences take their course. Personal matters, like these, should not be a corporate HR issue.
I think companies should not be restricting personal relationships at work and they should not be involved in their personal conflicts. By restricting and getting involved, decisions are made at arms-length - mostly without context - which, today, has tended to permanently limit or destroy livelihoods; careers, colleagues, friends, family, the company, the company”s partners and customers, etc.
As an example, I hired a brilliant, elderly, chemist. Friendly, interesting but shamelessly unabashed and old-school, he liked to talk to the female employees, ask them out, etc. Rather than discuss with him directly, a few of the women reported him to HR. I had to fire him. Alone, again, distraught, he died. The technology he developed helped us sell our company. The women who would not confront him directly got a windfall from the stock options, they had.
16
@Deer In Headlights Yes, it's always the woman's fault. We shouldn't even let them in the workplace to tempt serious, hard-working men.
39
As a professional tech, I am very disappointed Google executives covered this up and then granted 90 million plus to a man who sexually exploited women workers who were junior to him.
This sends a terrible message to women currently working at Google Corporation.
37
The me-too movement has been long overdue.
However, its disproportionate occurrence in this Anglo-Saxon culture obsessed with sex as the most heinous of sins is more than curious.
It is the abuse of the power vector rather than voluptuousness that is the true sin. Hence I fear that Mr. Trump, the me-too poster child, may have been right for the only time in memory in his assessment of Al Franken’s abdication for his “sin” of a lame SNL skit.
It would behoove us to remember that this power vector is a tricky demon, that goes in either direction. Too often the skillful narcissist intuits how to cynically work the system and thru implicit blackmail ”sleeps the way to the top” by picking the most “powerful” person in the organization as the sexual conduit. In the end the implicit threat of exposure is a no-lose tool, because one can always pull the sexual abuse trump card. The underlings Mafia-inspired implied threat is far more effective and heinous than the “more powerful‘s” sin of the flesh.
These are not the ravings of a right winger but of a card-carrying leftie. The lack of balance threatens, as did Michael Avenatti’s late pile-on in the Kavanaugh debacle the truth of Dr. Ford’s testimony.
Maybe jettisoning „what would Jesus do?” in favor of „what would Tony Soprano do?” would be a far more effective guide to the perplexed.
12
Just another in the growing number of reasons why VP Pence's avoidance of being in close quarters with an unrelated female makes more and more sense. As the many signs carried by the mobs say: "This is war." Enjoy it, "progressives."
13
I love how the word "cheat" never appears in the article, which instead pussyfoots around infidelity by calling it "dating while married." Cheating is cheating no matter whether the cheater is a billionaire or a bum; this is a person who finds deception suits their self indulgent purpose and to whom others matter little unless of use.
So much for not being evil. I'm sorry to say that I love google's products and use a pixel phone and a chromebook. It's distressing to know of this seemingly accepted culture of hedonism, greed and lying thrives at google. With all three of my grown children in the tech industry, I hope they never have to experience any of this sick culture personally.
29
I’m guessing the NYT chose the words that they chose because they wanted to be inclusive to non-standard relationships.
But you can’t accept those standard deviations and then be surprised when people behave like frat boys. In the past men were just as bad but society would literally kick them out for publicly embarrassing their wives; today we don’t. If you only live for your own desires then it isn’t surprising when you start abusing your power and using people as a means to your end.
So much of what we like about society, being decent to others, being nice to political foes, acting a certain way, etc. is enforced through shame. If you remove the stigma or consequences of public shaming then most humans will revert to their “pig like” hedonism desires.
I personally would love to live in a society where men and women, gay or straight, black or white are treated equally but we follow etiquette lessons of how to behave by the original Emily Post. At the very least, I’d be happy if everyone followed the golden rule.
Oh well...
6
This is a good opportunity for Mr Pichai to EXIT without being “soiled”by the sordid happenings at Google.
6
I met my ex at work....there was no subordinate situation, though at the time I was in a higher ranking position with 8 years more experience than she. That said, her prospects were much brighter than mine. There was no prohibition on dating (and there was no internet dating) so long as no quid pro quo job stuff going on or a subordinate situation (on either side). It’s life.
The relationship turned out to be the Biggest regret of my life, but i’m sure that there are millions of work relationships that turned out wonderful for both.
So a few critical questions- how is one “coerced” into performing oral sex? Has anyone ever watched a soap opera? People lie when they are hurt-just a truth.
15
Probably not coerced like rape but coerced in the sense that she didn’t feel she could say no without paying a significant price for it.
Think about it this way, if you go on a date and the guy wants sex and the girl says no the worse she will most likely lose is a relationship with you. Now if you go on a date with a higher up at the company the worse she can lose is her job, bonuses, and possibly millions of dollars (based on what Google apparently pays).
So I can understand how someone might feel like they were coerced.
14
@Powderchords One can be coerced by threats or by physical assault. Be grateful that you’ve never learned that lesson from experience.
14
NO, Ziyal. I don't buy this 'give me what I want or you're fired, your bonus, stock options and salary gone.
Can this be the case? Anything is possible, but, this would be the exception, not the rule.
2
What a great story...
Everyone wants to wallow in the bad behavior of high-flying male execs, and understandably I guess. Yet there are many instances in which a woman voluntarily enters into a relationship with a male superior, then cries foul when the man dumps her. This is not the same thing as assault or coercion. Some of the cases reported in the article are clearly men acting badly, but others are simply relationships that were broken off by the man involved. The women go into these relationships with eyes open, then claim exploitation when they don't get the prize. Many women are truly victims, but other use victimhood as a lever or crutch.
14
Jon, did you read the article for the details?
Mr Rubin's particular kink was to own multiple women as slaves. That's OK if it is all consensual but it was not (even Google agrees about that). AND this was a woman working at Google junior to Rubin. You cannot call this a "relationship" (your words) and then say this is all about jilted women. Appalling.
37
@K Henderson: I read the entire article.
3
It would really help if this column just concentrated on the egregious cases. Some of them, like having a consensual relationship mixing with "forced sex," can be murky. Granted, one of its intents is to describe the outcome of subsequent breakup, when the female partner ended up getting the short end of the stick. Still, the human heart is finicky. A jilted lover can reconstruct love into hate. This is not to make excuses for the predators, even if it is a go-go Silicon Valley
5
it would have made a lot more sense to have paid the victims millions of. dollars, not the executives.
22
12 days until the election. Please do more of these stories. They no doubt will get many more independents to vote. In the Upper West Side of NYC and Palo Alto, CA. In the Midwest? Hardly. Spend your time with more of these stories about well to do men and metoo and spend more time on Kavanaugh while you are at it. That worked out well. Make sure Trump’s surrogates here in the Midwest get re-elected. Do not focus on health care, jobs, non affordability of college, Social Security or anything else that impacts our life. Spend time on social issues near and dear to progressives and get more of what you have and further turn off men in the Midwest showing how out of touch you are with the critical real world problems we face DAILY in our own lives..
31
@Golflaw The Upper West Side has no competitive elections anyway. Neither does most of our entire State-Gov, Senate, AG, Comptroller, State Leg. My neighborhood doesn't even have a GOP running for Congress or State Senate
4
After reading this, I’ll be looking to drop my gmail account.
9
@J.K.O. May I suggest Protonmail.com It's out of Switzerland and pretty good.
9
It is a tough situation for Google. It is the natural inclination for a company to make bottom-line financial decisions. The goal of a company to maintain competitive advantage and to grow and/or remain profitable. Cutting loose with these men in a way that is commensurate with their actions could have compromised the company's competitive advantage. Ultimately what is more ethical? Maintaining and growing their staff and thereby helping our economy or punishing these men? It is not a clear cut answer.
4
A 90 million payout was necessary!? Please.
9
@JJ From the article, the "$90 million payment" constituted a reduction of 40% of a $150 million grant that Google's board already had approved. It's a lot of money, but not the same as a severance payment.
2
Engage in an extramarital affair at work until it no longer serves you. Then file a complaint. Sounds about right.
21
Where is Mr Rubin in your short version?
10
We were pondering the long hours our - sex obsessed - CEO spent at work. Someone said that at home, his wife tells him to take out the garbage, at work, he tells everyone else to take out the garbage.
He took great pleasure commenting on the intimate details of any currently disfavored subordinate's sex life, usually in a public forum, acting as an all-knowing, all powerful, Illuminati. I assumed all C-Suites were the same; sex being a full time preoccupation.
7
Well. At least they pushed him out.
This article unhelpfully blurs the line between what happens when colleagues date and harassment. Different problems.
26
Oh, the irony. A search engine company tries to cover up.
Was this before or after dropping the “Don't be evil” motto?
7
It’s hard to get sex. Everything does not have to be a big relationship.These guys really never matured. Stay away from women in the same company PERIOD. Now if you really need sex there are the yellow pages remember them,or the internet, anonymous dating,regular dating. Just do not use your power to get there. Your not as bad as you look.Girls out there will like you for who you are as a person. Maybe.That’s if your single. Married I have no advice.
8
Richard. My thoughts too. All these guys could have had ‘legit’ affairs without the coercion.
8
Men in this article walk away with $$$$$ Millions. Women either stay and are demoted or walk away with 000000. It is a replay in Dollars and Cents, of the Kavanaugh hearings. Kavanaugh is on the Supreme Court. Dr. Ford is still being harassed and may not be living in her own home.
This is US 'justice' for the harasser and the victim. We have promoted the status quo. There is no change even with the 'Me too' movement.
30
Why can't Rubin, Page, Brin and all these other guys date outside of Google/Alphabet?
15
@Tedj, they were not 'dating' they were cheating on their spouses.
7
an interesting point. Brin seems to only be interested in his employees too.
2
Because most people meet their significant others at work.
5
Power corrupts - no, that was the good old days - now Power just makes creeps
13
Best search engine is. https://duckduckgo.com/
Not Google
Don't use Chromw browser either. Firefox is a great browser.
Google tracks you and sells you data. "Do no evil" indeed!
9
@carrucio google is much more than a search engine and DuckDuckGo is a fringe player kind of like Gab is to Twitter
OK, so "Do No Evil" is now "Cover Up Evil and Carry On!". Besides the male dominance embedded throughout this story, the scariest part, perhaps easy to overlook, is this: "Mr. Rubin built a robotics division within Google named Replicant. During a six-month span in 2013, he spent an estimated $90 million to buy eight robotics firms." This is the world married to AI (artificial intelligence) - and this - the guy into bondage or 'slavery' and misogyny - is an example of who is 'programming' it. Yikes... At the very least, find alternatives to Google - Firefox and Duck Duck Go are places to start - everything counts.
12
Sure is special that they used "Do no evil" as their corporate slogan. Mass mind control and all that.
3
In the future, CEO's will spend all their time pondering their employees' sex lives and none of their time on trying to make their products better.
3
As an Apple user I am an outsider to the workings of Android, but if we look deeper at ourselves we all need a reality check on this level. Steve Jobs at first said his child wasn't even his. I saw the movie, read the book, buy the products. Of course if this happens in the military you can loose everything, so we indeed do not live in an equal world.
6
On the one hand, people who are sexually harrassed/ assaulted deserve justice and compensation. On the other hand, I'm equally disgusted by the behavior of the men and women in this article. It seems like the men took advantage with their money and position while the women saw nothing wrong with engaging in extramarital affairs at work believing there would be no or little fall-out. Are people so naive that they automatically believe marriages are "polyamorous" or "open" as stated by one party without confirming it with the other married party? Even if that were true, the whole work situation should have made everyone think twice.
24
So right, there is blame to go around on both sides.
I attribute these stories to the numbing of people; it is rare to find people who actually think of others’ individual feelings first before taking actions, e.g., the wife of the husband.
As a society we have become better at empathizing with groups than individuals. We feel bad for discriminated against groups but then we don’t think twice about dehumanizing are hurting an individual. It is sad.
4
Ugh ! Gives me an icky feeling typing a query into Google's search page. Time to switch search engines, and hopefully Google's management will be forced out without golden parachutes. Seems like shareholders should be able to sue company management over this type of bad behavior.
10
@tjsiii I highly recommend DuckDuckGo as a search engine.
2
@Ziyal Thank you ! I will.
While these stories are terrible, they do seem to be relatively rare. What isn't rare is the abuse at these companies when it comes to their employees work/life balance.
There is recourse for sexual harrassment. There is no recourse for being forced to work 60, 70, 80 hours a week and more. If you don't scale up, you get fired.
Its apples and oranges, I know, but the digging on the sex stories is now to the point where major outlets are covering consentual relationships (ie here). Nonconsentual apporpiation of weeknights and weekends is abuse that's a real scourge of tech and finance.
68
@John McDavid Only a man would say that being "forced" to work long hours (while being handsomely compensated) is worse than sexual harassment. Are you under the impression that sexual harassment victims go on to some fabulous experience after reporting?
37
Really John? It's an article on sexual harassment and sexism in the workplace and you want to bring up work hours? It will take 100 years at our current rate, to create gender parity at the executive level.
Maybe work/life balance would be more better if women ran the place because women's brains are wired for better social awareness.
I'm really sick of men deflecting this topic. Sexism is real, we've dealt with it our entire lives. We want change and we want it now.
16
@John McDavid
One should also note, the women BEING harassed were also working 80 hour weeks doing the same legal work, coding, and technical work. They had the same brilliance, the same Ivy League law school degrees, etc.
They were treated like paper cups by Google: used and thrown away, while the men were paid millions.
Why oh why, am I always harping on Cluster B behavior?
Because it's *everywhere.*
22
I worked at Google for a year and am not surprised in the least by this. Like Uber, the culture there is very much about treating high-performing male software developers and male senior leaders like royalty. They have a serious cultural problem with entitlement, as a result -- entitlement that extends from little things like which brand of bottled water "must" be stocked in their microkitchens all the way to entitlement over the things that are OK to do and say to co-workers, especially women.
I guess if you invented a great search algorithm, it makes you above adhering to basic workplace norms like civility and respect.
302
@K
I can’t imagine why a company would want to keep their most productive employees happy
5
@Rain Parade
Corporations all seem to be drunk with power out there in Happy Valley. Is there something in the water or just the ink on greenbacks?
3
See also Genentech in its early years (1980s). Same situation: obnoxious self entitled managers and executives dipping their pens in the company ink. R&D costs equaled marketing trips to high-end resorts for marketing executives/reps and their spouses. Doesn't sound like R&D expenses to me.
15
Every female Google employee involved in these incidents, and subsequent firings of the men, should receive the exact same monetary compensation and cordial departure as the men did. I hope they bring a class-action lawsuit and win.
In fact, if all US companies had to abide by these rules (same payout, both employees leave), perhaps serial sexual harassers would stop.
Of course, there would be zero payouts if the "credible women accusers" had to be paid the same ridiculous sum of money as the men were.
The real underlying problem here is that women are not valued and are in no way treated as or considered to be equals. Until women at publicly-traded companies are hired in equivalent numbers to men, given equivalent job titles and duties, and paid equal pay for equal work, none of this will change.
83
@Stargazer66
Exactly. The double-standard is so clear here. A tech guy who takes advantage of others (primarily women) gets a golden parachute to go away -- to make things easier for google. A female who doesn't have cache with google gets the back door slammed behind her. The only rational conclusion I can see is that google has a pretty sick (not in a good way) culture.
18
That is not a cultural problem, that is a values problem.
The difference is subtle but significant, values are more steadfast than culture - culture does and should change but values should be the bedrock of the company.
Google has bad values as evident by how their leaders acted - all of their highest up execs behaved like frat boys
7
I'm not sure what Andy Rubin's severance package has to do with any of this. He was paid for his contributions to Android, not for breaking company rules.
He was rightfully fired for breaking the company rules after the allegations against him were proven to be credible.
28
After reading this article, you'd think that companies advertising there products on Google would be dropping the platform like a hot potato.
12
I wish the article had made up its mind whether (a) Google could have fired Mr. Rubin and paid him little to nothing on the way out or (b) Google's hand were effectively tied by the $150 million stock grant which was "an enormous bargaining chip when he started negotiating his exit."
If Google's hand were tied, it wasn't a payoff, no matter how many commenters call it that.
38
Under the guise of #metoo/feminism/equality, we have entered an era of extreme Victorian/Puritan guilt-ridden negative attitudes toward sex. In contrast to the 1960's, where sex was thought of as a jaunty, frisky frolic in the hay between consenting people, current PC culture has devolved to viewing sex as pure power-mongering exploitation of hapless female victims, punishable by public shaming and career death for the male perpetrators. Congratulations, Catherine MacKinnon. Beam me up, Scotty!
35
If consequences like a Supreme Court appointment or a $90,000,000 payoff count as "career death," I would like to be a professional cadaver yesterday, please.
26
@Dr. Reality And your comment - as off topic (read: controlling) as it is - is as indicative of the problem for which you have no understanding. I welcome you to learn though. (And you may want to revisit your thoughts about 60s sex culture and understand that beyond the headlines.)
14
@Barb -- Case in point.
And the very same top honchos of Google fired James Damore for a blog post. And no doubt clutched their pearls during th Kavanaugh hearings.
33
I applaud Times for publishing this article. It shows how sick our so called super heros are.
What I fail to understand is why even the lady allow a neck rub? Why not just leave? Is job more important than your humiliation? At what cost?
17
Of course a job is worth more than humiliation. See: all of human history.
42
Have you been in this situation? Her ‘allowing’ the neck rub is not the issue here.
6
@Eraven":
Why so judgmental?
1
I guess this is why there's no money left for the rest of us.
52
Why do so many people behave as though they were desperately unhappy? They have to abuse others to get what they want.
13
Time to start using a new search engine (ahem, Ecosia).
8
I posted this as a reply, but I hope NYT will allow me to post it again so it is seen more broadly.
Consensual... such a problematic term.
One night in my dorm room more than a decade ago, my boyfriend, who was six inches taller than me and fifty pounds heavier, forced me to my knees, opened his pants, grabbed a fistful of my hair, and pushed my face into his groin.
I had performed oral sex on him before, but until that moment, it had been my choice to do so. Just because you've done something consensually in the past does not mean it's always consensual.
119
Lost in your headlines and slant, is the fact that Google actually fired Andy Rubin before it was "fashionable" to be sensitive to sexual harassment.
And, while $90 million is a lot more than I will ever have, absent a Lotto win, it is less than the $150 million Larry Page earlier decided to pay Rubin for his work on Android.
That Larry Page felt Rubin was underpaid for the value he brought to Google through Android, and then independently, without any obligation to do so, gave him additional compensation in the amount of $150 million, speaks most highly of the character of Mr. Page.
For Google to then rid itself of Rubin without all the negative publicity and possible associated legal morass, for a $60 million discount to its original $150 million commitment to Rubin, puts an entirely different spin on matters. That this "spin" fails to neatly fit in your efforts to excoriate Google, does not in any way diminish its attributes.
40
Is it "fashionable" to take sexual harassment seriously? I thought it was basic human decency.
12
While this is news to many of us, I think many people who work for google knew about these guys.
As this article shows, these guys are protected not only as it is occurring, but also on their way out.
Where is the google board?
27
@Meg Conway
"Where is the google board?"
They're trying to pay off the secretaries they've assaulted sexually!
5
Doubtful that any of these guys has ever seen Ex Machina. It's about them. It's about how these guys have so many women skeletons in their closet who just want out of their trapped situation. Don't say anything to them; you don't have anything intelligent to contribute to the conversation. Just bring them their tea and desserts, and don't spill anything along the way. Disgusting.
23
I know Star Simpson. We went to MIT together. Shes been in the news before because she wore a breadboard with lights to Logan and the police almost killed her thinking she was a suicide bomber. She actually left MIT after that because MIT basically abandoned her and the people of Boston treated her like a terrorist.
She is a genius. I remember talking with her at Senior Haus several times and I protested when MIT didnt stand up to the Boston PD for her.
Now she gets put into a sexual situation with Devaul? Poor girl, she just has no luck. As for Devaul he sounds like a creep.
69
This is the lifestyle that many of the 1% live, whether they are Google execs or corrupt New York real estate developers with political ambitions.
129
The Catholic Chuch. The UPenn Football Team. Police Brutality. And now Google.
One thing becomes clear: wealthy, powerful organizations can't be trusted to "police themselves." I maintain that there needs to be an external system that keeps track of these claims. In many cases, victims can't "prove" that they were assaulted, especially when the assault took place as part of a consensual affair, or if they were propositioned by their boss in private. But if there were a place for victims to record complaints, anonymously, and then to decide to take action if they heard that other people had made the same complaint against the same person (thus creating more credibility), we'd have a lot more success going after serial abusers. That's essentially how the MeToo movement has worked, informally. If all women came forward at the same time, they had a hope of being believed.
What we know for sure is that a company's HR department doesn't care about victims. It cares about protecting the company. End of story. Google can say whatever it wants. It protected itself, here, and that meant protecting abusers.
50
@Rachel C.
Upenn? Perhaps you meant Penn State football team?
8
Kleenex, a brand that has avoided newsworthy scandal for eons, yesterday got rid of its "Mansize" version, to avoid accusations of sexist branding. Meanwhile, Google, employs a Trumpian strategy of lie, payoff and employ Orwellian language ("do no evil")to sidestep their responsibility to run a decent business. I'm going to be so, so disappointed if Kleenex is outed as a similarly horrid corporation. And so, so sad if Google doesn't face a massive declination in value caused by a consumer boycott of their "free" search engine. We've accepted cheap wampum in return for our intellects. It's time to scalp the invaders.
10
@Quite Contrary Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac. Doubt that it will change anytime soon, regardless of the #MeToo movement which has the lifespan of the daily news.
5
@Dlud Indeed. And what everyone seems to forget is that power is the ultimate aphrodisiac for many, if not most, of the women attracted to these men and portrayed as victims in this article.
1
I thought such miscreants were supposed to be punished, not rewarded with the likes of millions of dollars.
12
This makes me wish there was a good alternative to Google. Bing, I will try you...
16
@JJ, use Duck Duck Go (http://www.duckduckgo.com/, and it can also be set as your browser’s default search engine). Two reasons: one, it sends your query to more than one search engine, and two, it anonymizes your search, so those search engines can’t track you and use your searches as data for their advertising engines.
13
DuckDuckGo is a great search engine and doesn’t track you.
3
@Andy agreed, Duck Duck Go is the way to go
6
"Google could have fired Mr. Rubin and paid him little to nothing on the way out. Instead...."
The implication of the article is that Google should have fired Rubin and paid him next to nothing. But since when is it the role of an employer to determine the merit of a claim that an employee coerced someone into performing oral sex and mete out justice accordingly? And where is it written that justice, in such a case, means loss of employment and compensation?
15
p.s. Just to be clear, I do think that an employer should follow its policy against sexual harassment. But the tone of the article seems to be that Google should be judge, jury, and executioner, going beyond whatever that policy requires. That is what I am questioning.
5
@Mark
Most large companies do have written policies on employee personal interactions and expectations of "appropriate" communication, written and verbal, and conduct between employees, other employees, bosses etc. that are distributed regularly...regarding sexual harassment and such.
As you say, how the merits of inappropriate behavior/harassment/coercion/claims of any sort are "proven" is another matter. Pretty sure that most large companies do advise employees that violations of their policies can result in termination...thinking of a case at my job when somebody was fired (actually after a couple addl verbal warnings) for using company computers in an office cubicle to watch porn.
4
@Mark
How does a man "coerce" a woman into performing oral sex?
I am trying to understand the claim itself. If man does not beat a woman into submission or forcibly rape her, it becomes a refusal with mouth shut tight. No sarcasm or meanness is intended. I don't see how a woman can be 'coerced' into oral sex.
Women are portrayed as helpless, vulnerable victims of male brutality, incapable of dealing with a situation.
Whatever Google did or did not do - I really don't care. Mega-millions for those who create billions. It's a corporation and not a safe haven for the tearful. Do your job, contribute, rise up or out. Women can choose. "Coercion" Really?
4
"Everything in the world is about sex, except sex. Sex is about power." - Oscar Wilde
Wilde, though pithy, wasn't entirely correct: Power and money will out, and information is power, including the hiding of it. Google made good investments in getting rid of these men but ensuring they couldn't damage Google in the meantime, and in keeping it out of the news. Until now... now information disclosed is power, too, as we've seen.
12
Yet another story which demonstrates how white men are venerated and fiscally compensated despite despicable and inappropriate workplace behavior, while women suffer the consequences of their actions.
It is becoming harder and harder not to be completely demoralized as a woman in America in 2018.
31
@X Y
Not just white men... Drummond is African American, Singhal is Asian, etc.
14
@X Y clarifier has already mentioned Drummond is African American and Singhal is Indian American, etc.. As for the demoralized woman issue, the answer is to start women-run businesses and not let greed or neediness to fit in get in the way of bringing about true social change. Unfortunately those who take power do not share or give it up easily, or sometimes ever. So one has to fight for it and this often needs perseverance.
For starters, women need to overcome the instinctive "jealousy" stereotype that kicks in when one seems more successful than oneself. Men are jealous too, but they have learned to control it till they are in a position to do something about it. Women, African Americans and others who have been out of the opportunity stream need to recognize they need to adopt social behaviors different from their norm in order to succeed in their ambitions which are beyond the current norm. This might seem unsympathetic, but it is more sincere than the superficial flattery and "come cry on my shoulder" rubbish offered by most "well-meaning" people. This is a fight, crying is not allowed, for it is no substitute to decisive action.
5
Gosh! I'm never going to use Google again!!! If only!!! These technocrats have so much power and have reaped such huge gains that they will remain forever arrogant and insulated.
6
Eww, now I have to give my Android a really soapy hot bath.
17
In case anyone doesn't know, leading a team that writes an operating system is not an act of genius.
60
So much for “Don’t be evil.”
17
Why does everyone regard these men as unique, precious geniuses? Why are they so revered and protected? Does anyone actually believe that there would be no competing mobile operating systems against Apple if not for heroes like this jerk?
For a company that prides itself on innovation, Alphabet has done a dismal job at the biggest innovation in the history of industry: hiring talented, innovative people that do not look like white dudes.
It's about time we all grow up and reject the fratbro culture that turns a blind eye to wrongdoing because a few fratbros happen to be talented. There are a lot of people out there who could be just as influential, if only they were given the opportunity these men who jeopardized for all of modern history.
31
Of course they paid him off. Stellar technology giant of the future stuck in 19th century same old. Now comes the spirited defense. Suggest Larry Page and team use their search engine to study men behaving badly.
14
Man, I am totally going to boycott Google.
But wait, Google search and Gmail and YouTube and Google docs are free tho, so ...
Can’t boycott Google. Totally use that stuff everyday. And it’s free and 80 percent of smartphone users aren’t going to suddenly buy iPhones.
I guess that’s what power looks like.
12
Why don’t these rich guys get real and do as the Hollywood actors do? Pay for it! Preferably in foreign countries where prostitution is legal...
8
@Moe Def
They're interested in more than just the sex. It's the authority leveraged during the exchange. He's a man in power and she has no choice but to give up her career or succumb. Prostitution at least gives the one getting paid to be on a more equal basis (ESPECIALLY in jurisdictions where it's legal), as they both have to agree on a price at the outset.
16
Ahh yes, white men being fired for misconduct and being gifted with millions of dollars they were not contractually or legally entitled to. American capitalism at its finest.
10
@QTCatch10
You think race has anything to do with it? And pardon my eyesight, but Mr. Drummond doesn't look white.
12
Not apples to apples at all, but I own a business and have fired people for being late 3 times.
This guy has a credible claim of sexual misconduct and they give him a golden parachute?
It's just so nauseating. For shame!
17
When you fired those employees, did you withhold their remaining pay? This is essentially the same thing just on a massively grander scale. He had a $150 million contract. They brought it down to $90 million as he was shown the door. The optics aren’t good but had they sent him away with $0, he would have prevailed in court.
3
He did not have a 150 million contract. He had grants worth thAt, which were likely invested. Totally different.
2
I'm not a fan of the Me Too movement. There's just too many aspects of it that bother me. But, “Being owned is kinda like you are my property, and I can loan you to other people.”
Are you kidding??!! Makes me want to take my android phone to the nearest wrecking yard and see it crushed into bits.
The words disgusting grotesque pig were made for this man.
29
I'm reminded of one of Google's earliest principles...Do No Harm. Alrighty then.
9
Recall where all the cash for these payout came from: Selling your privacy to the highest bidder.
88
" for a select few, there are no consequences”
This will never change.
29
More evidence that money diesn't equal integrity but that money negates scummy in the world. Rubin's ex isn't smearing him- he did a darn good job of that himself even if it hasn't hurt him at all.
29
Google may not DO evil but it certainly IS evil.
10
Hi Larry(family)
This is great news makes me very happy, we need you in the loop stay there Larry or go yourself? now that's an idea.
2
This is just so depressing. So many hard working people are fired for no good reason and given nothing, but these creeps get millions of dollars! Our society is messed up it is beyond all reason!
103
Just more of the same from the bro-ocracy.....
21
@Mojowrkn
Which isn't limited to men.
How about a new name - the Despicables, the Rich and the Ugly. Deplorables just doesn't do it justice.
A good portion of the settlement should be assigned to the victims.
23
The part about Rubin and "ownership", while probably not a crime in and of itself, is so hideous that I had to re-read it several times for clarification. That being said, how do you "coerce" someone into performing a sex act on you when you are in a consensual relationship? My question is entirely serious, considering this type of thing is coming up more and more often. I would honestly like clarification, and if I am a bad person for raising the question, I do apologize. Abusing a position of authority, groping, and even extra-marital affairs are all things that I can see as being actionable offences. Especially when your affairs are on terms as grotesque as Rubin's apparently are.
24
In consensual relationships, each partner has the option of not engaging in sexual acts if they don’t want to in that moment. What they willingly did with the same partner previously has no bearing on future acts. If one partner says “no” and the other forces the other to comply, it is coercion-rape-sexual assault. Even if you’ve done that thing together a hundred times, once you compel the person to do it against their will, you are in the wrong.
28
@Aria
I agree.
Whatever coercion means, the article implies it was bad enough that she ended their relationship over it, and an internal investigation convinced Larry Page that he had to go. That seems pretty significant given how powerful Rubin was. (And remember: this was a few years before Me Too.)
But more important is what LaDawn said.
11
@Aria
Your confusion is entirely understandable. Yesterday, I would suggest Googling some of the terms you don't understand. Today, I'm suggesting you get a dictionary or install Firefox. Then, look it up.
4
Any company who actually has to say “don’t be evil” as a motto is sketchy at best.
10
@Roy
I believe they also STOLE that motto from the House of Blues, which had a similar if not exact motto in 1990, but this history has been mysteriously erased from any internet sources I can readily access from BING.com... Am I paranoid, forgetful or correct?
3
I hope if the woman he was accused of assaulting/harassing files suit, she is awarded at least $190 million.
20
$90M payout to this creep. $70M to Megyn Kelly. On and on it goes. The greater the transgression the greater the reward. Corporate America is warped beyond repair. Meanwhile teachers, police, military make nothing and we're seemingly ok with that.
53
The only female characters in this play are the victims of harassment, love interests and the Google HR director (shock). PS - Can you imagine a world where there was this much disruption/rigmarole (and blessings of cash!) resulting from women behaving badly? The 21st century patriarchy is alive and well.
43
@Erin If women were equally represented in power circles, their behavior would be equally lurid. One of the other myths being busted is the "sugar and spice" narrative that some seem to want to duplicitously maintain while equalizing power. Ime, nobody wields emotional abuse and extortion like the female persuasion.
3
@Erin
And if we had a shred of honesty, HR would be renamed Human Predation.
10
Star Simpson is an amazing, creative, fearless materials engineer. I hate that I had to hear about her again in the context of google rejecting her after a doughy senior exec unsuccessfully tried to seduce her. Give that girl a lab and some money, Silicon Valley.
77
I agree I remember her from MIT. She is a genius.
9
@Rill
The peachy part is, thanks to the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, these guys can then play a disproportionate part in our elections.
8
@Rill From reading this article, I am not so sure about her judgement though. Maybe it can be attributed to youth but even in my early 20s -- when I had several senior physicians/ healthcare executives suggest I go out with them as a junior doc -- I was careful to avoid anything that might turn into potential trouble or give off the wrong appearances.
2
Clearly, we may need a new verb to replace "google it", which now means the opposite of its former definition, e.g. discover meaning. I suggest we say "look it up on the internet" instead, and agree that "google it" now means "bury evil deeds with obscene amounts of cash". Synonym: payoff.
This story, though not earth shaking, and flawed by its conflations of immorality and criminality, belongs nonetheless on the Tech Page and should be required reading for all those still in thrall to the geeks of SF, those looking to STEM as our savior and all regarding social media as anything other than a cancerous plague.
10
@Quite Contrary
Could I recommend Bing it!???
2
Is there any limit to the millions of dollars these companies shovel into the bank accounts of their top executives? These guys don't seem to be able to take a breath without the company handing them another million. What a con!
53
So why don’t these companies make inter-office dating a firing offense?
7
Not sure why David Drummond is mentioned in this article ? He's apparently not accused of harassement nor any illegal behavior by anyone.
A large proportion of relationships begin in the workplace (probably including the NYT), which is actually great.
1
@Adrien - even a consensual relationship between a supervisor and subordinate is usually prohibited at most companies. Why? Because it cannot always be seen as consensual. Often the subordinate feels obligated to participate or continue the relationship due to the power imbalance.
13
@Adrien
I believe he's mentioned because of the contrast between how the company treated him versus his female partner once they disclosed their relationship.
4
@Lisa B Exactly. My company wouldn't allow married couples in the same dept either, too many possibilities for conflicts and issues with other employees I guess.
3
Don't be evil (to your employees' severance package, that is).
10
When the General Counsel engages in this type of garbage, employees are truly and completely hosed. Maybe, I have too a high an opinion of my profession but many lawyers and compliance personnel do believe they play a role as the "conscience of the company." But like everywhere else the fish rots from the head.
10
@ROK
And that platitude does not absolve any individual for complicity.
1
Well we knew they gave up on that "Don't Be Evil" thing a long time ago, so...
10
So they were having a consensual affair, and during this affair on one occasion he "coerced" her into performing oral sex.
Sound to me unless there were threats of violence or a threat of employment retaliation, it's really no one's business.
4
@Ron
Hi Ron,
And how would you go about proving that threat in a court of law? The court of public opinion is all that women have to resort to in the absence of a society that values them as anything other than vessels of male dominance and conveyors of heirs. As it always was, we have been blinded by our belief in our generation's magic capacity to erase the evidence of humanity's embrace of racism - against women. And many of us females remain complicit.
3
Thanks for this article. Honestly, it reveals only the tip of the iceberg of corruption and abuse at Google.
Google’s moto used to be "don't be evil". Google’s (Alphabet’s) contributions to America’s society and economy are about the same a tumor in the human body. It is doubtful a tumor thinks it is evil. The tumor just wants to mindlessly grow unaware it is destroying its host.
Is Google any worse than Facebook, Uber or Airbnb? Sadly, it probably isn’t.
11
Thankfully the article did not attempt to conflate this X-rated Romper Room with #MeToo, as it appears that most of these shenanigans were consensual. But neither should it go unnoticed that, as Ann Lander might say, while the "bad boys" came out relatively unscathed, the "bad girls" did not.
10
@Marty
Relatively unscathed? I'd say rewarded is more accurate.
15
@Marty
- coerced sexual act
- groping an employee
- sexually exploiting a young applicant
I dunno. Those all sound pretty bad to me.
5
I wonder if more people in Silicon Valley are not closet Trump supporters. Similar mindset when it comes to treating women and subordinates.
14
Let this be a lesson to Silicon Valley executives: commit sexual assault, get $90 million.
44
$190 million? $200 million more? What can any man do with that much? On top of that, an affair to boost his ego? An average person in this country can only hope he or she makes enough not to be in debt and be able to provide for their family if they have one.
29
@Eastbackbay
Yeah. But these guys are gods. Look to the swamp for more evidence.
5
Why Sundar Pichai refused to address the Andy Rubin matter? That was a key part of the article: senior execs gets away. Like Trump said, when you are a celebrity, you can get away with anything. Grab them by the...
16
while some of these incidents reflect wrongdoing, I am not sure that the case of Mr. Drummond and Ms. Blakely does. They informed HR of their relationship and, with the full consent of both parties, who at the time expected to be in a long term family relationship, they worked out a resolution. The fact that their relationship failed does not mean Google did something wrong and, she is somewhat correct in referring to herself as the "liaibility, because, without this resolution, Google may have run afoul of employment law. But it didn't, she knowingly chose to execute waivers and accept that resolution.
2
@Mitchell, the point of the article is that even when consensual relationship is admitted, running counter to Google’s policy, discouraging employees to have sexual relationships with co-workers, only the subordinate employees get to pay for their misconduct. Meanwhile, the executives, more often than not, get a slap on the wrist and looked over. That the waivers were forced upon her, and not on the executive, is an example of Google only protecting its executives and not the employees working for them.
31
@seannie
Boycottt Google, violator of privacy and enabler of bad bro culture. Firefoxy!
3
@seannieThe point I was making was specific to this one situation. Google policy did not prohibit the relationship, it discouraged it and required it to be reported. When reported Google had to make a decision to eliminate the potential problem. Of course, any company will prefer to keep the more senior seasoned important employee in their position and transfer the other. In some cases, the other employee may object, but, in this case, she did not because she was making a personal romantic decision. It was only two years later, when they broke up and had a custody battle that it was recast as a discrimination issue where she was the "liability." It would not surprise me if the woman was the older more senior and important employee that an employer, even Google, may prefer that the male move to another department. I have actually seen that happen in my own workplace. My main point is that not every situation in this article is the same and that this particular situation cannot be taken as an example of supporting the general position in the article.
While I can believe these affairs may be consensual in the sense that no explicit threat or promise was made, it seems obvious to me that any affair with a subordinate is implicitly and presumably nonconsensual and if the subordinate later states it was not consensual we should accept that as presumptively true. These executives who engage in affairs with subordinates must be made to know they are taking an enormous risk and the subordinate's finger is the one on the trigger.
7
@THOMAS WILLIAMS
How is the executive taking an enormous risk? His reputation? Seems they don't really care much about that, nor do their equally powerful colleagues. Certainly they won't be fired, and if they are, they are paid an obscene amount of money. I wish I could get fired from Google!
The subordinate is the one in the vulnerable position, bc they (usually) are being paid a comparative pittance, have no power for recourse and little $$$ to hire expensive attorneys, and are usually fired. And blackballed. Their potential earnings can be ruined for a decade or more, even for a lifetime.
11
This is clearly misleading to any readers unfamiliar with nuance. They didn’t give him $90mm as a gift or grant him equity as a favor.
These were likely contractual terms that were negotiated long before any misdeeds were known.
As written further down in the article, Google simply made a business decision not to fight those terms because of confidentiality, business and non-compete reasons.
Most businesses would have done the same thing (and most corporate lawyers would probably recommend the same to their clients).
10
I wish we humans were more evolved then we are. It seems like we are just the animals that we have always been.
Technology isn't helping us become better people.
23
This is the company that decides what you and everyone else gets to see in your search results. Mostly their stuff, and rarely anything from their remaining few competitors.
Feel good about this? Trust in their judgment and ethical standards? Me neither.
130
@Xoxarle
Switch to DuckDuckGo for searching. Much better.
6
Hi, I am a little concerned here about the seeming lack of clarity between the consensual relationships/affairs and allegations of sexual harassment. Sexual harassment and assault are extremely serious offenses, and should be treated as so. A consensual affair or relationship (whether extramarital or not), such as those outlined in the second paragraph under 'I Was the Liability,' seem completely irrelevant compared to some of the other sexual harassment claims outlined in the article. We need to be careful not to mix these two concepts.
155
@Stephanie Tilden
No. You've missed it. Don't get too close to the glass that you miss the view.
The article is about the gender difference in Google, in tech in work, and they provided several cases here to support how the genders fared vastly differently in the cases.
Nothing was "mixed", except perhaps in the minds of readers themselves.
7
The consensual affairs were a violation of Google's code of conduct. Sometimes it's the cover-up that is the scandal.
8
So, Google, are you paying the victim of the misconduct a good portion of the royalties from Rubin's exceptionally successful Android venture, which would in fact be sending the right message, not only to Mr. Rubin the perpetrator, but to those who seem not to think that sexual assault is a serious and highly traumatizing crime?
I sure hope so.
14
"When asked about Mr. Rubin and the other cases, Eileen Naughton, Google’s vice president for people operations, said in a statement that the company takes harassment seriously and reviews every complaint."
Unless they don't.
120
Where are the stockholder law suits? These huge sums that the boards are paying out to executives forced out for bad behavior should be going to the stockholders who own the company. Class action suits, if not made illegal by our present Supreme Court, should be filed to require present executives and board members to reduce their salaries and bonuses and make whole the stockholders.
60
Excellent points. Lawyers, where are you?
3
I'm a female in my early 40s... have been a senior exec at a fortune 500 company... and I should say...
In my next life, I would love to be a man and have a senior job at Google or any other Fortune 500 company.
Until all of the HR Heads that are women aren't replaced by true people... these cover ups will keep happening!
104
@New to HR is the perfect department to start testing robots as employees!
8
If I play for a basketball team for 2 years, and then decide to quit, but get pressured into playing another game and say "ok" because the team is short players... can I sue because my playing was "nonconsensual"? Should those players involved in the game also be banned from further basketball? Maybe just the captain gets banned?
...even though I decided to play more basketball without being physically forced to do so?
3
@Tom L
The problem is she was pressured into it not just by the individual pleading with her, but because he has power to influence her career and she smartly feared retribution. If playing in the basketball game resulted in lifelong trauma like a sexual assault does, say you were injured and it prevented you from continuing in your career, then you could certainly sue. In any case this is not a situation where the victim sued, she just reported it to HR, this guy violated the terms of his employment.
7
Ok having issues with this; FTA: "The woman, with whom Mr. Rubin had been having an extramarital relationship, said he coerced her into performing oral sex in a hotel room in 2013"
So:
They are having an affair
They are at a hotel- this is where the "affair" occurs- sex
He asks for her to do a sex act
And it is Coercion?
The only way I see this as Coercion is if the entire affair was coerced and if so Google should have hung the dude and had her file a criminal complaint.
Having worked in HR I understand why many females are reluctant to file a grievance or compliant- Yes I have had to deal with idiots with some power and who use that to "satisfy" themselves, but a company is duty bound to properly handle a complaint of coercion since in many case coercion is actually a criminal act based on what is coerced. I am thankful I have worked for ethical companies
10
Consensual... such a problematic term.
I hope the moderators will let me tell this story.
One night in my dorm room more than a decade ago, my boyfriend, who was six inches taller than me and fifty pounds heavier, forced me to my knees, opened his pants, grabbed a fistful of my hair, and pushed my face into his groin.
I had performed oral sex on him before, but until that moment, it had been my choice to do so. Just because you've done something consensually in the past does not mean it's always consensual.
8
@Ron Martin
--Also, the article does not state that he "asked" her to do a sex act.
2
Nerds behaving badly... quelle surprise.
I wonder what comes up if you google any of this stuff?
16
@WilliamGaddis'sGhost I don't believe in ghosts, but I do believe in William Gaddis, may he rest in peace.
1
Wow! Seems these tech co's are a wasps nest of lies and deceit. Guess it goes along with the overly high salaries.
13
Entitled, billionaires, creeps.
29
Men, power and sex...no surprise, sadly.
17
Some sexual harassers are a little "more equal" than others, I guess.
14
dang there are a lot of millions in this article
12
Who knows what happened but, gosh, would the woman go into his hotel room in the first place?
What happened to do no evil ???
Time for Google to have a female president and CEO and CFO.....
The only cure for these old white male oligarchies is female leadership to scrape off the slime
23
Google found a woman's forced-sex-act claim credible (and, btw, that's criminal sexual assault), yet paid the perpetrator over-the-top millions. Color me not surprised by any of this. I hope they've been sweating whether someone would call them out with the advent of the #metoo movement and concomitant reports of djt's non-disclosures.
But at the risk of picking nits, OMGosh NYTimes, when will you stop using the word "mistress." It has been pointed out to you repeatedly (including by Paula Broadwell on your own pages) that this is a derogatory term only applied to women. Stop it!
152
@TSD. Well, I'm not sure there is a kinder word for the position of "mistress." Accept that for which you sign up. There is always "girlfriend," but that seems to be a cotton-mouthed euphemism, as the term is also utilized to refer to single women dating single men. Feel free to use "scoundrel" or other derogatory language for the men that are married and engage in the extramarital affair, usually without their wives' consent. Or, "boytoy" for the single men dating married women. Whatever pleases you.
6
@TSD
Of course Paula Broadwell doesn't like the word 'mistress', given her own affair with . And I totally agree that it's unfair and sexist that we should have a derogatory word for the 'other woman' and no obvious equivalent for the 'other man'. We should absolutely come up with one, and I hope Ms. Broadwell contributed some suggestions. (Maybe 'mister'?) Switching to a gender-neutral derogatory would do just fine too, say 'cheat'? Knowingly engaging in infidelity isn't the type of behavior we should normalize through neutral language. It's behavior that should carry societal shame, every bit as much for men as for women. It sounds moralizing, because it is. It's also the least we can do as a society for the other 1 or 2 victims whose trust was betrayed, and who in many cases suffer irreversible psychological trauma in the process. Dropping the derogatory all around doesn't help them at all.
13
"In a civil suit filed this month by Mr. Rubin’s ex-wife, Rie Rubin, she claimed he had multiple 'ownership relationships' with other women during their marriage, paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to them. The couple were divorced in August.
The suit included a screenshot of an August 2015 email Mr. Rubin sent to one woman. 'You will be happy being taken care of,' he wrote. 'Being owned is kinda like you are my property, and I can loan you to other people.'" Owned??? Property??? Loaned out to other people??? This is repulsive.
262
@CLN
And yet 50 Shades and Handmaiden are popular fare. Which tells you everything you need to know about our sick, sick culture. One could hope that the creepy peeps in Silicon Valley are just big, obese canaries in the coal mine. But that would be optimistic, I fear.
11
@CLN-"Some of the most powerful men in Silicon Valley are regulars at exclusive, drug-fueled, sex-laced parties—gatherings they describe not as scandalous, or even secret, but as a bold, unconventional lifestyle choice."
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/01/brotopia-silicon-valley-secretiv...
4
Hmmmm, how many women were mentioned in this story of improper conduct? Google is a sleazy "boys club." Worried more about potential lawsuits from sexual predators and deviants than doing the right thing and standing by the accusers/victims. March them out the door and straight to the nearest police headquarters and charge them. Google proves they're spineless. "The father of Android" was awarded $90 million for being a low-life predatory thug. $2 million a month? He should be behind bars.
67
"When Google fires lower-level employees, it typically marches them out immediately and pays little, if any, severance. But for senior executives, Google weighs other factors, said former executives."
We've always known that the uber rich will protect one of their own. And these are but examples of that system. Lower level employees are mere pawns in this game.
13
Please don't say he was the creator or 'father' of Android. He oversaw a large, very talented team in the development of Android, which is a different thing. The over-elevation of these folks is part of the reason they feel entitled to behave the way they do.
523
@jp-ia
Sounds like your beef is with Larry Page not the Times. Also, from the sound of it, these guys measure their self-importance in dollars, not technological innovation.
5
He invented Android. It was a startup he sold to Google.
3
Oh My God! Rich people have concensual relationships. If any of these folks misused their power or positions, please God, sue them with fury. If not, let them live in peace.
10
Let us quote from the article:
"What Google did not make public was that an employee had accused Mr. Rubin of sexual misconduct. The woman, with whom Mr. Rubin had been having an extramarital relationship, said he coerced her into performing oral sex in a hotel room in 2013, according to two company executives with knowledge of the episode. Google investigated and concluded her claim was credible."
Note that even the NY Times does not say her claim of coercion was proven. And the woman is said to have had an ongoing sexual relationship which was apparently consensual.
But the NY Times suggests that it isn't enough that he has lost his job. He must now be held up for public shaming, that may prevent him from ever having another job.
A sexual relationship might be like a marriage. We have to apply a common sense criterion here: Do women ever lie in divorce court? Can any woman make an accusation against any man, true or not, and destroy that man by public shaming in the media, like the NY Times?
The motto of the NY Times was once "All the news that's fit to print." The news that was not fit to print presumably included news of a salacious nature such as affairs between consenting adults.
The NY Times seems to have abandoned its earlier standards, perhaps in an effort to gain readers from those who earlier sought the National Enquirer. Or perhaps it is an effort on behalf of the editorial board to change sexual mores within the US. It's the wrong tactic.
18
I wouldn't worry about Andy Rubin's career, something tells me he'll be just fine!
5
They fired him and gave him severance. That IS punishment; he actually lost his job. Do we want to live in a world where someone can lose their entire livelihood -- job, severance and all capacity for future employment -- because of one sex act during an admittedly consensual relationship that one person says was a consensual sex act and the other says was not? Maybe it was just a misunderstanding and we won't ever know, because there's no video. Do we really want to not only fire that person but also cut off their contractual severance, without even a court trial? This demand seems almost fascist to me. They fired him. Why isn't that enough punishment? I say this as the survivor of sexual assault.
6
@Reality Check
I disagree with your comment. He shouldn't have received a severance! what about the pain he caused to her.
Maybe people would think twice before having affairs at work! Because the woman always looses when they break up!
4
Why men are allowed to be in charge of anything is beyond me. They are obviously not competent or trustworthy.
I hope he gets sued into oblivion.
48
No surprises here. But it sure is a scary time to be a man.
5
@BMD,
Welcome to the world. It's always been a scary time to be a woman.
13
@Broce Well said!
1
This is a new step, so it's good an entity with all the money in the wold gets to open this door.
A couple who met at work live an affair, and THEN the guy makes a demand for a sex act.
In - what? 45 states? This woman/plaintiff is shown the door amid hearty laughter.
The country folk have a saying about all manner of life experiences: ''You knew it was a snake when you picked it up.''
13
The two faces of the democrats. Google is a democratic stronghold and a major contributor to democrats running for office. This poor behavior is tolerated by them at Google but not elsewhere. Seriously folks, are we willing to tolerate this?
7
No, which is why we need to get corporate money—ALL corporate money—out of politics.
7
Where can I sign up for a pro-sexual harassment course?
It's apparent from this story that sexually harassing women is the quickest way to obtain promotions and accumulate massive wealth. I pity the fools at Google and elsewhere who have yet to decipher the formula and engage in their own fair share of harassment. They have no shot at advancement and amassing wealth beyond most people's wildest imaginations.
High-fives to all those corporate boards out there who are savvy enough to appreciate how discourteous it would be to withhold hundreds of millions in bonuses merely because some exec is chasing skirts around the water cooler. Thank goodness their priorities are in the right place and they can all sleep well tonight.
And you know, America needs to lighten up and let our execs have a little fun! They work very hard for a living and deserve a little down time in the office for fun and frivolity!
Now pardon me whilst I run out to my flag-waving Patriot club, where we sniff the thrones of our great American corporate and civic leaders and thank our dear Jesus that all is well. Donald Trump has set a wonderful example for the kids and it's comforting to know our nation's capitalists are paying attention and doing the right thing!
18
Wait a minute, aren't the majority of those named major contributors to the usual left wing causes? Former Fed Chairman Volcker has recently warned that the country has descended into plutocracy ( see nearby NYT article ).
6
Apparently I should not of been taken back when I saw the photos of the Google executives walking with the Saudi's . This company "first do not harm" has harmed the American public in ways that are to many to count. Senior executives have gone out of their way to abuse women. Qualifications for women don't matter just be male play toys. When we have used you up and want to move on, we pay you off. Everyone is having affairs, all at the same time monitoring and tracking Americans who use your services to sell items to people.
Now we know of the financial relationships Google has with the Saudis and once again it is all about the money. These executives should hold their heads in shame and use there money to build affordable housing for everyone left behind in there quest to turn SF into their own country. They own women ,and the public an explanation for this type of junior high behavior.The nature of this story is disgusting as are the people's whose names are highlighted. We have met the animal and it is the technology executives who are selling this country down the river for gadgets and power. Technology executives who are nothing more than a cancer on our country who will do anything for power and money including selling out our country. Anything.
28
@Tony
Note, they didn't pay the women off. The women got nothing. They paid the men.
6
I don't see a lot of "meat on the bone" in this article.
Lots of questionable accusations, a clumsy and questionable proposition and lots of clearly consensual relationships that may be questionable.
The subtext reminds me of the line in the novel "Shogun" about there being only one punishment for crime - death.
2
Seems like this is just as large and meaningful a story as the sick, immoral culture at Uber.
22
@Hank, Didn't this article say that Uber discharged him after a couple of weeks when they learned the reason he'd left Google?
3
So these are the moral midgets that we're giving all our information to constantly as we go about our daily lives. They know more about us than our friends do, and then they turn around and sell that info for big bucks so they can pay off their jerk employees. Great.
79
A very large proportion of relationships begin in the workplace, which is great.
So I'm really chocked by the way the NYT pictures Drummond to the crowd as some sort or harasser, implying Google should have punished him or something.
1
Wherever there are powerful, wealthy men, there will be women who will engage in sexual conduct with such men. Many of the women will be motivated by non-mercenary interests, while some will be motivated by mercenary interests. Men who engage in such conduct often violate company policy or law, and when the relationships do not last, the women with the mercenary interests often have an opportunity to obtain substantial settlements or awards, based upon sexual discrimination/harassment claims, while the men may be punished by losing their positions and/or paying significant sums to the claimants. The Google men in this article have apparently escaped such a fate.
9
As a shareholder, I am deeply offended that corporate assets are used to buy out the men who were involved in problematic relationships with co-workers, and on terms that were very generous. If any lawyers who practice shareholder derivative litigation are interested, I would expect that other shareholders are similarly offended.
209
@Judith. I am also a n offended shareholder.
4
Gee, why wouldn't I trust Google with my private information? Their executives have such high standards of behavior....
19
"Don't be evil?"
That's Google's informal motto. Rubin forced a Google lower-level employee to have sex. He "dated" other lower-level employees. He had direct promotion and firing power over some if not all of them. He told them that he "owned them and could loan them out to others." Google covered it all up, and paid him $90 million. If that's not evil, what is?
330
They needed to pay him or else their other amoral executives wouldn't stay and perform the tasks that only an amoral executive can do. They can't have people who are concerned with the lives of others in high positions, it might cut into their profits. I am sure they have ethics officers who know that their task is not to be real ethics officers but to develop propaganda which dumb people believe shows that they have ethics. I think this is pretty standard corporate operation techniques and is painfully obvious to those of us not in a cult of some type.
8
It will take at least a generation, maybe more, to eradicate the cultural acceptance and permissiveness when it comes to harassment of this kind. As usual, those who have the gold, make the rules, and the golden handshakes, are often the ususal way to 'do away' with such behaviours. Not only that but these 'people' with such huge egos feel entitled to behave in any way they wish, and continue when allowed. If only their mothers knew! Shame....
3
No wonder they were on such a hiring spree the past few years, what with some execs having so much else on their minds than work.
8
I am amazed at the use of "Consentual Extramarital Affairs"--
So, apparently 2 people agreed.
But did all 3?
43
I know this is not the point of the article but the amount of money these people make is so obscene.
336
@ENILORAC
The obscene wealth amplifies it. For them, sexual indiscretions—or worse—is source of income.
8
Google (and corporate capitalism) are sick.
10
These immoral executives are robbing the middle and low income folks. The amount of the $$$ is incredible.
11
Just like Brian Krzanich. The valley is rife with this behavior. These companies pretend to care about equality but instead are complete hypocrites
6
Has it been forgotten that the criminal code exists to deal with acts deemed serious enough to warrant punishment, and that every person is innocent until proven guilty in an impartial court?
28
@joel dibkin
exactly. And Google should have reported the claims of misconduct to the authorities so they could be investigated instead of paying huge sums of money and trying to sweep it all under the rug.
85
@joel dibkin your comment has absolutely zero relevance to anything in this article
8
It sounds like a series of morally questionable relationships, mainly extramarital affairs, that somehow went astray. With little actually details, in all cases the victims appear to be the woman. And the article then describes how not enough money or stock grants were denied to the men.
It sounds like Google is taking action where needed, doing investigations, and coming to reasonable conclusions. It also sounds like they're doing it in a respectful way that doesn't smear shaming stories all over the media.
What is questionable is why the details of their exit need to be questioned. Exiting seems to be the result of the issue, a violation of some code of conduct with the company. That is their punishment. Which is an appropriate action. But it seems a bit excessive to expect their wealth to be taken, their stock grants denied; which is really an issue between their employer and them.
12
What is a person to do when a coworker "knows how to use their body and looks to get ahead"? That behavior was very common among women, but declining, in the 1950-60-70-80's; I am sure it exists today. Simple rule: don't get your meat and bread at the same place. But at the organization level: No one in accounting, legal, or HR should have ANY relationship [familial or sexual] with anyone else in the company.
13
@Tamza
What's a person to do? Keep his hands to himself, regardless of whether the coworker next to him has cleavage or not. You can't use your looks and body to get ahead unless the other person and the company culture allow that.
In my experience (I'm 60) in the tech world, no one can use their looks to get ahead. The work is too difficult, the hours required are intense, and the overriding desire for corporate profit requires that everyone on the team actually knows how to do the job well. If you don't, you'll be out on the street in no time. Talent rules over everything but the good old boys club. It's a very, very high pressure environment. Your assumption that women are not hired based on ability is insulting, and inaccurate.
4
@Tamza
@Tamza
What's a person to do? Keep his hand to himself, regardless of whether the coworker next to him has cleavage or not. You can't use your looks and body to get ahead unless the other person decides to let you.
In my experience (I'm 60) in the tech world, women can't use their looks to get ahead. The work is too difficult, the hours required are intense, and the overriding desire for corporate profit requires that everyone on the team actually knows how to do the job well. If you don't, you'll be out on the street in no time. Talent rules over everything but the good old boys club. It's a very, very high pressure environment. Your assumption that women are not hired based on ability is insulting.
4
I can't imagine how a woman who had a dispute in a consensual affair would expect to take her dispute to her ex-lover's management and expect them to do anything.
35
@John Mardinly Well said!
Unfortunately, it is wider than that. Now at Google, when you raise concerns, the Google Code of Conduct team gangs up with Google People Operations to threaten employees. For example, immigrant employees are told how raising the concern or choosing to follow-up on the concern can impact their career, immigration status etc. I am sure Google leadership does not desire this but Google Code of Conduct and Google People Operations are using employee vulnerabilities to pressure them not to raise concerns or follow-up on them.
134
Don’t be so sure that Google management wants a change. Human Resource personnel follow management’s orders.
10
@Rea Howarth That is very much possible. When concerns such as the above are brought to the attention of Google Employee Relations, they are more interested in burying the information, fudging the internal data, discrediting the person who raised the concern etc as compared to addressing the problem.
They also have creative ways to not keep the names of those involved in investigations confidential without skirting the law to try and intimidate and discourage Googlers from raising concerns/taking part in investigations. Essentially, raising a concern/taking part in an investigation will mean your name will be revealed to the rest of your team/rest of Google etc due to the, "process of the investigation."
3
Rea could be possible right. Whenever the conduct of the Google Code of Conduct team and Google Operations team is brought to the attention of Google Employee Relations, Google Employee Relations seems more interested in fudging the internal data, humiliating the person who raised the concern etc than actually addressing the problem.
Also, the Google Code of Conduct team has very creative ways to skirt the assurance of, "confidentiality" they give by intentionally revealing the names of people who bring up concerns, take part in investigations by revealing their identities to team members, other Googlers etc as part of the investigation. Therefore, while on paper they say confidential, they intimidate employees from raising concerns, taking part in investigations by using these creative ways to compromise their identity, humiliate them, make them feel unsafe etc.
8
I knew Rie back when she was married to my close friend who had moved together to SF for his graduate studies. My friend was perplexed why Rie was going to so many late night work parties at this new internet company. This seems to have been the accepted work culture at Google back in the late 1990's & early 2000's.
It turns out that Mr. Rubin and Rie were having an affair at Google while she was a junior employee Mr Rubin's work romance at Google with Rie, a married woman, broke-up my friend's marriage.
I helped move him out of their SF apartment while she sat and gigged on their couch with her coworker- one of the saddest experiences I have ever witnessed. I told my friend to take half of her stock, as this is the law in California, but he was too noble and descent of a human being. I guess what comes around goes around.
352
@Jeffrey Smith
So are you saying that Rie dumped her husband to advance her career ?
There can be no honest discussion, until it is recognized that this happens
12
@Gerhard Duh,
No one besides this Rie knows if she dumped her then-husband to advance her career, or just because she took her marriage lightly and felt like switching it up? Disgusting in either case, but mostly irrelevant to the discussion.
No one is denying that some employees try to bribe higher-ups with their charms to climb the ladder. Of course it happens, and of course it's wrong of them to do so. But it's just as wrong of the higher-ups who accept the bribe in exchange for whatever career benefits. Plus it's wrong to enter into a relationship where you have the power to retaliate on the other person if they leave.
And if there's a poor innocent little exec somewhere crying that it really had nothing to do with power and they were just seduced by a wiley junior employee, well then boohoo. They knew they weren't supposed to, but it was fun so caution, meet wind. Sorry, but if you can't even be trusted to keep it in your pants with your staff, you definitely shouldn't be trusted to hold power over them.
Simple. If you let yourself be bribed knowingly, no reward on the way out. If you felt like having fun with your staff was worth the risk, no reward on the way out. If you actively pursued your staff, ew that's even worse.
4
@Jeffrey Smith you know there's a whole bunch of different interpretations about all that you write - do not misread laughter, for instance, or even attending late night parties. Best to watch your interpretations -- then spreading them in the NYTimes. Kindness. Peace.
8
Non-consensual sexual coercion is a contemptible act that should be appropriately punished. In this particular case, it seems unclear as to whether or not there were any issues of consent. The situations listed are referred to as “extramarital affairs”. Though morally questionable, the term is still indicative of consent between participants. In situations here there is no measurable impact on the workplace itself, it is highly questionable whether or not any business entity should be probing into the private lives of its employees. Consensual extramarital affairs are none of any employers business. A great societal challenge lies in not repeating our past mistakes. Attempting to over-regulate morality is a fools errand. Fundamental human behavior that results in long-term relationships has always frequently started in the workplace, it always will. You can’t outlaw consensual human interaction. It is also a fools errand to write too many ludicrously complex rules about who can be working with whom, at what level, in which department and on what floor. Over half the people I’ve dated in my life have been peers at work. This is true of a huge percentage of the population, maybe over half. My old employer was overflowing with workers married to or divorced from each other. Every consensual relationship that begins at work, even ones that eventually fail, should not be automatically treated as another Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein incident.
81
@AndyW you might want to check on your reading comprehension-- the main misconduct claim against rubin isn't the adultery, it's non-consensual oral sex, mentioned multiple times in the article.
27
@AndyW,
Note that the issue is non-consensual actions, not affairs. Also, it's against policy to have an affair with anyone in your direct or indirect line of report, and this too was violated.
19
@AndyW, ... except that all of the extramarital affairs were men in authority positions over women. And that women almost always suffer career and reputation repercussions for these affairs and men do not. Do not dismiss the exploitation of women by men in power, even if the relationship is consensual.
18
Google appears to be using their stock options as a means to covering up wrong doing by their executives and buying their silence, i.e. avoiding any public discussion that might effect their business. If i'm not mistaken their chief executives mentioned were also supporters of Ted Cruz in the last election. Cruz is a climate change denier--so much for their environmentally friendly stances--not when it interferes with their ad sales, hiring, or restraint of trade policies.
49
@loveman0 Actually the company execs are predominantly strong Democrat supporters.