

California Supreme Court: age bias case against Google can move forward - grellas
http://www.siliconvalley.com/ci_15683556

======
houseabsolute
It would be interesting to see what exactly Urs said about this guy, in what
context, what this guy's personality is, etc. Being an "old fuddy-duddy,"
while without a settled meaning, I think basically is a way of saying that an
old person is acting childish or unprofessional. If that's so, one easy way
not to run afoul of the law is to say that the person acts childishly or
unprofessionally. Of course, you should also document concrete examples of the
same. For example, if the person in question frequently shoots down proposals
in meetings by saying the moral equivalent of, "That's not how we did it back
at Bell Labs," just say that. Also, saying the guy's ideas are "too old to
matter" is a dick move IMO. If you want to abandon rational explanations for
why you don't like someone's ideas, just say, "We're not going to do that, end
of discussion." No need to get personal.

This goes back to my personal doctrine of trying to say exactly what I mean. I
find that some people try to solve problems by saying things designed to get a
person to do what they want, but without being direct about it. On more than
one occasion I've observed this has led to hurt feelings where I think the
direct approach -- just ask for what you want -- would not. For example, if
your coworker bothers you while you are trying to work, "Hey, could we talk
later? I am trying to work," would probably be received a lot better than,
"Damn, dude, you talk a lot." This example is contrived but I have observed
concrete cases not too different from this a number of times.

Anyway, hopefully no one reading this article is stressing out about not
having a demographically appropriate workforce, because it seems very unlikely
that alone will be enough to get you into trouble.

~~~
paul
It'd difficult for me to imagine anyone at Google (at least in that era) using
the term "fuddy-duddy". None of the quotes sound like anything I ever heard or
over-heard, which of course doesn't prove anything, but it's not the culture
that I ever observed.

~~~
grellas
When things reach a lawsuit stage, they often take on a surreal air and become
increasingly disconnected from what is likely to have happened in fact.
Lawyers embellish, witnesses develop convenient memories, and those with a
motive or agenda will tend to shade their testimony in ways that promote their
case (on one side or the other), whether or not this conforms with exactly
what might have happened. I don't mean by this that most people intentionally
perjure themselves (they usually don't). I mean only that, once it all goes
through the lawsuit grinder, what emerges may or may not be recognizable to
those who actually went through the experience or who know the environment.
Often, it isn't. Just a sad fact of life of what happens when people start
fighting in the courts.

~~~
todayiamme
That might be the case, but another thing that might be at work over here is
that people do have biases/prejudices that they are unwilling to expose in
front of others. Someone smart enough can easily hide their real feelings on a
subject in most situations, but as soon as they get annoyed, threatened or
angry it starts to come tumbling out.

Perhaps, over here he simply encountered a few people with unresolved issues
and got a raw deal because of it.

On the other hand, this happened when Google was relatively young an
interesting question is, what happens in large organizations? When you hire
people they tend to bring their baggage in them. So, now the question becomes
how can a culture be created that allows people to transcend their prejudices?

I just don't know.

------
fuzzythinker
I think this is actually bad for older job seekers no matter what the outcome
is, just because of awareness. The next time a skilled but borderline elder
candidate applies to a younger company, the company will probably have a
higher chance to pass on the candidate.

~~~
Daniel_Newby
Especially if the candidate's name is Brian Reid. He must not be planning on
ever working again.

~~~
maukdaddy
If he wins the suit he won't have to.

------
gscott
"Google asserted in court documents that Reid was fired because the program he
headed was being eliminated and because of poor performance."

Hopefully the Google Wave crew is not reading this. (some sarcasm intended, if
Google started laying off people for working on a project that ended up being
eliminated then employees would be fearful to be placed on anything not
established.)

~~~
chc
That's "and," not "or." Wave team members don't need to worry unless they
suck.

~~~
uxp
Specifically regarding Wave, all the information from Google states that they
loved it, and will most likely continue using it internally, which they did
for months before it was announced. The technology they developed to build the
product is also being slowly integrated into their existing products (GIS's
redesign seems like it took some of the ideas of wave) as well as being
available for integration in new products.

Regarding this article, this was 6 to 8 years ago, and Google didn't have its
'persona' it has now. It was still a company struggling to gain market share
and I would imagine they wanted developers that strived to push the boundaries
of what the web could do. Reid very well could have not had that same goal,
being an older generation who already had an ingrained idea of what the
internet was and was unwilling to work towards a more dynamic internet. This
is all my personal speculation based on personal assumptions, however.

------
countersignaler
Obviously any kind of discrimination sucks, but I have a hard time getting
worked up over age discrimination. It is not like sex or race where you are
hampered from the start and never have a chance to show your potential.
Everyone is young then gets old. Systematic age discrimination just creates a
market opportunity for businesses willing to hire old people. You could say
the same opportunity exists in the sex and race cases, but they have the
potential to be self-fulfilling prejudices--people locked out of the workforce
from the start--whereas the age one doesnt really perpetuate itself.

signed entitled young white male

------
jan_g
This case is interesting to me, because I've always been under impression that
in USA you can hire and fire whomever you want. Which is not the case here in
Europe, where workers are protected like endangered species if they're on
permanent contract.

~~~
moomba
I'm glad Google had the balls to fire this guy. Judging from the article, I
was working with someone similar to this guy. He had a Phd and had been in the
business many years. His code was terrible and he acted very childish. The
company I was working for at the time did not fire him. He did subsequently
leave which was a relief.

~~~
dws
Reid was no coding slouch. He won the 1982 Grace Murray Hopper award for
Scribe.
[http://awards.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=5356574&srt=all...](http://awards.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=5356574&srt=all&aw=145&ao=GMHOPPER&yr=1982)

------
tkahn6
"[At Google,] young 20-year-olds don't necessarily see a place for
tremendously talented, experienced 50- and 60-year-olds." - Reid's Lawyer

Definitely. Rob Pike and Ken Thompson are neither talented nor experienced.

~~~
jedc
Don't forget Vint Cerf!

~~~
hubb
Peter Norvig is certainly quite the young upstart.

