Comment by davidf18 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by davidf18 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This FB post is referred to in the article, written by a woman who is very, very supportive of TK: https://www.facebook.com/margaretann.seger/posts/10214004058...

1000 people have "liked" the posting including Zuckerberg and a number of women have commented in support of TK.

EDIT:

This is from the FB poster, Margaret-Ann Seger. Other women seem to confirm her perspective. If it were truly a sexist culture as was claimed then you wouldn’t be seeing these testimonials. It suggests that despite everything, something else is going on.

“Thank you for creating a culture where- as a woman- it was okay to, no, encouraged to speak up. This is one of my oft less-told anecdotes, but I feel it's appropriate given the circumstances. Before Uber, I was at Facebook. I left Facebook because I was told that I was too aggressive. Pushing too hard, wanting to move too fast, challenging the status quo a bit too much. The amazing part is that coming to Uber was like a homecoming. I could be who I truly am, without being labeled an "aggressive" woman. I could push on assumptions, move quickly, do whatever work needed to be done whether it was "in my area" or not, question leadership in an open, earnest environment. It was like a breath of fresh air. I don't think people realize how unique this is. This company truly listens to every voice, from the VPs all the way down to the junior PMs like myself. Thank you. Thank you for listening and creating an environment where the best answer truly does win.”

If it were truly a sexist culture as was claimed then you wouldn’t be seeing these testimonials.

Fascinating.

One group of women saying the culture in Uber is corrosive? Well that's rumour and innuendo.

But another group of women saying it's fine? Well, then that's just the way it must be!

Confirmation bias much?

Here's the thing: There was an investigation. By Eric frickin' Holder. Not exactly a legal slouch. Out of that came nearly fifty recommendations for ways to fix the culture.

Are we to believe Holder was just full of it? That it was all manufactured? All because 6% of the Uber headcount think things were fine?

Edit:

Incidentally, those women that are supportive of Kalanick could easily be explained by survivorship bias. That is, the women that ended up in groups that didn't suck, or could handle the culture, stuck around while the rest left.

> "One group of women saying the culture in Uber is corrosive? Well that's rumour and innuendo."

I never suggested rumor or innuendo. But it is sexist to not believe not a single woman but a number of women who come out and support TK. Women know even if they have not experienced it directly (e.g. "the grapevine") if it were a sexist environment. It is sexist to discount the FB poster, Margaret-Ann Seger and the many other women who have come out in favor of TK. Ms. Seger even suggests the cultural difference which favors her personality in her post where she said she was too aggressive for the FB environment but fit right in with Uber.

Eric Holder would not be my first choice to investigate a corporate culture. There are professionals who have both MBAs and who are clinical psychologists that even specialize with hi-tech companies who also see patients on an individual basis. Eric Holder is not a clinical psychologist, has no clinical experience, is not an expert in corporate culture let alone the unique culture of the hi-tech startup firm.

These people have the clinical and business experience to deal with corporate cultures and those that specialize in hi-tech firms understand that unique environment.

Disclose, I have worked with such a specialist.

I have worked in Israel and the culture there can be off-putting to many in the US, especially those from the west coast. Intel, which employs 10,000 in Israel, even offers cross-cultural classes between West Coast and Israeli culture. Many people would consider Israelis very pushy (Hutzpah is the term). Israelis are very direct and many people don't like that. I happen to love that but adjust for different people.

In summary, it is sexist to discount the opinions of women who worked with TK. Eric Holder is not a clinical psychologist nor an expert in hi-tech culture. He is no industrial psychologist. It is strange that a non-professional would be chosen to investigate the organization.

Something else was going on.

But it is sexist to not believe not a single woman but a number of women who come out and support TK.

ROFL. I could literally replace the word "support" with "do not support" in this sentence and it would be an equally valid argument.

A bad one. But equally so.

Read my comment again. I already explained why both groups of women could be right.

Something else was going on.

You're confirmation bias is showing again...

To suggest that there is an culture of sexual abuse and for a number of women not to feel it and to state otherwise is sexual abusive. In fact they went as far as to praise the environment.

It is suggesting that these women's feelings should not be taken seriously.

You are either pregnant or not. You can't be both.

As I mentioned earlier, Eric Holder is a lawyer, the issue has do do with emotions and Eric Holder has absolutely no clinical training let alone clinical training for this specific kind of environment. That makes him unqualified to make judgments.

The question is why wasn't a specialist brought in. Someone who has the clinical training and business training who has experience dealing with hi-tech startup cultures brought in for an evaluation. It makes everything highly suspect.

I am not denying that some women and others may have been put off by the culture. Or that there may have been some specific cases of abuse. But clearly there was no culture of sexual abuse.

It simply cannot be that Ms. Sanger and a number of women were highly supportive of an environment that promoted sexual abuse. They are not crazy, they are not in denial. It was not a pervasive culture.

There is something else going on and to do everyone justice, don't use an unqualified lawyer to investigate, use a qualified industrial psychologist with extensive clinical training. Use the right person for the job.

As I said before, I have dealt with such a highly qualified individual. I use awareness of cognitive biases in my work where unlike Uber, cognitive biases can kill people.

Something else is going on. A properly trained industrial psychologist with clinical training and who knows the hi-tech startup environment should investigate.

Let's set aside the claim that stating an argument can be "sexually abusive"--I can't express how ridiculous that is--and cut to the core of your argument, which, if I may, can be summarized as follows:

When it comes to whether Uber possesses a sexually abusive workplace environment, You are either pregnant or not. You can't be both.

This is perfect example of a false dichotomy.

Corporate culture is not some monolithic thing.

Uber is a 15,000 person company. Individual departments and reporting chains likely varied significantly. That there may have been groups or departments in Uber that did not share the corrosive culture experienced elsewhere in the company is not only within reason, but to be expected.

I am not denying that some women and others may have been put off by the culture. Or that there may have been some specific cases of abuse. But clearly there was no culture of sexual abuse.

Do you work at Uber? Have you experienced their culture first hand? What, precisely, makes you qualified to make this determination, thus invalidating the claims of others who do have first-hand experience at the company and have said otherwise?

I looked into this a bit further and there was an entire committee including Holder but nobody that was truly an expert with a background in clinical psychology and industrial psychology consulting. The committee has not one qualified professional with any clinical psychology background at all suggesting they were more interested in dealing with bad publicity than they were actually investigating and understanding and fixing a problem.

You have not addressed at all the fact that they did not use a professional to investigate these claims.

> "What, precisely, makes you qualified to make this determination,..."

I don't have to work there. People such as the FB poster Margaret-Ann Seger and many other women who work there have been very upset about his firing. Just read the comments for Sanger's post on FB -- those written by women who support TK. There are 1,800 likes 350 shares, 65 comments to her FB post alone.

Google for the name "Margaret-Ann Seger" and you will see there are recall petitions and other positive comments by other women about the culture there.

You simply can't have these kinds of testimonials from women in there was a truly toxic culture there. Your issue is not with me, but the women who testify in TK's favor.

Culture does mean culture -- it means something endemic throughout. Undeniably there were cases just as there were cases in other tech firms. But to discount the words of the many women who work there supporting TK and his kindness and leadership is in itself discounting their opinions which is sexually abusive.

Another post from Frederique Dame: https://www.facebook.com/frederique/posts/10155430670252905?...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com