Google Promises Not to Muzzle Staff on Pay, Settling Labor Case (bloomberg.com) 21
According to Bloomberg, Google has settled one of the first legal complaints filed by a new union, promising not to silence workers who talk about their pay. From the report: "WE WILL NOT tell you that you cannot discuss policies with other employees," states the notice to staff, signed by an attorney for Google and parent Alphabet Inc. and being posted at a Google data center in South Carolina. "WE WILL NOT discipline you because you exercise your right to discuss wage rates, bonuses, hours and working conditions with other employees."
The settlement ends a National Labor Relations Board complaint filed by the Alphabet Workers Union in February alleging that management at the data center forbid workers from discussing their pay and also suspended a data technician, Shannon Wait, because she wrote a pro-union post on Facebook. Wait was reinstated earlier this year, although she left soon after. [...] The Alphabet Workers Union filed its complaint against units of Google staffing vendor Adecco Group AG, which employed workers including Wait, and also against Alphabet, which it deemed a "joint employer" -- a company with sufficient control over a group of workers to be legally liable for their treatment. The settlement also requires the companies to remove any reference to Wait's suspension from her file.
The settlement ends a National Labor Relations Board complaint filed by the Alphabet Workers Union in February alleging that management at the data center forbid workers from discussing their pay and also suspended a data technician, Shannon Wait, because she wrote a pro-union post on Facebook. Wait was reinstated earlier this year, although she left soon after. [...] The Alphabet Workers Union filed its complaint against units of Google staffing vendor Adecco Group AG, which employed workers including Wait, and also against Alphabet, which it deemed a "joint employer" -- a company with sufficient control over a group of workers to be legally liable for their treatment. The settlement also requires the companies to remove any reference to Wait's suspension from her file.
Can an 1099 sub be fired for have an union hat on? (Score:2)
Can an 1099 sub be fired for have an union hat on? If they try to set an rules about dress code?
Re: (Score:2)
Can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all. At-will employment motherfucker.
1. "At will" does not mean "for any reason". There is a long list of prohibited reasons, including race, gender, religion, and ... union activity.
2. 1099 contractors are not "at will" employees.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not wokeness, it's embarassing your company. (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't worry folks. They can still fire you if you are not woke enough!
They can fire your for far less. Also, most people who get fired for what you call "wokeness" is really about embarrassing the company. Have shitty views?...no one cares.
Have shitty views and share them publicly and draw attention to them?...yeah, you're probably going to get fired.
James Damore, Gina Carano are 2 great examples. Embarrass Disney for any reason and they shit can you. Many have gotten fired for far less. Damore upset so many people the CEO had to end his vacation. The crime wasn't
Re: (Score:2)
For starters, it's against federal labor law to punish non managerial workers for discussing pay.
What's the point here?
That'll prove itself immediately (Score:2)
That's a pretty low bar to set for themselves (Score:5, Informative)
Promising not to do something they can't really legally do in the first place...
Since at least the 1930's it's been illegal for employers to implement any disciplinary policies against employees who discuss their salary or wages.
Re:That's a pretty low bar to set for themselves (Score:5, Insightful)
what they're really saying is:
"Because we got caught breaking this law, we're following the advice of our lawyers and public relations staff and promising not to get caught breaking it again."
Re: That's a pretty low bar to set for themselves (Score:2)
False "we will *ACT* like we're following".
Let's be honest.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you get dropped on the head as a baby or something?
Discussing your pay with your colleagues isn't "crass" or "unprofessional". It's an important part of not getting ripped off by your employer. That's why they want you to think it's crass and unprofessional and "against the rules" even though it's perfectly normal and completely legal - more than that, it's illegal for an employer to prohibit it or punish anyone for doing so.
Re: (Score:2)
The reason that it's sometimes considered crass or unprofessional is that discussing specifics with regards to wages or salary can easily fuel unwarranted resentment or jealousy among lower paid individuals, or it can sometimes come across like a person with a higher salary is flaunting how much money they make in front of people who might otherwise already be dissatisfied with the amount of money that they make.. This is true whether a person is discussing their pay with a coworker or anyone else outside
Re: Can confirm circa 2000's (Score:2)
A NDA cannot stop anyone from discussing wages. Because that is a legal right. And no, corporations and contracts cannot override laws.
"Google promises" (Score:2)
*ba-dum TISS*
What are their promises worth? (Score:2)