Uber Ex-engineer Who Alleged Sexism Retains Lawyer (usatoday.com) 113
Marco della Cava and Jessica Guynn, writing for USA Today: The former Uber engineer whose critical blog post has stirred a storm of controversy for the ride-hailing giant has retained an attorney, charging that her former employer is blaming her for a rash of app deletions. Susan Fowler, whose Feb. 19 essay detailed myriad examples of sexism, tweeted Thursday that "Uber names/blames me for account deletes, and has a different law firm - not Holders (sic) - investigating me."
Breaking news (Score:2, Funny)
Man puts shoes on feet. Man proceeds to tie shoes. News at 11:00.
Re: (Score:1)
Victim Blaming? (Score:3)
Worked so well for Cosby, after all...
Re: Victim Blaming? (Score:5, Insightful)
Victim blaming happens far less than false claims
I don't know, I feel like it happens every single time one of these stories comes up. It's important to figure out the truth in these situations, but the rest of us who are not involved can calm down, step back, and wait until the truth actually comes out instead of trying to blame.
Re: (Score:3)
It's important to figure out the truth in these situations
Is it? I'm told insisting on evidence is "dick waving."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you lead with sympathy, you're good. If you lead with accusations, then you're bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you lead with sympathy, you're good. If you lead with accusations, then you're bad.
A problem, I think, is that too many people assume the presumption of innocence we must extend to an accused, involves a corollary presumption of guilt against the veracity of the accuser. That is not so. Someone making a complaint is entitled to the rebuttable presumption that their accusation is made in good faith, just as the person against whom the complaint is raised is entitled to a presumption of innocence.
The "
Re: (Score:2)
A problem, I think, is that too many people assume the presumption of innocence we must extend to an accused, involves a corollary presumption of guilt against the veracity of the accuser.
This problem can be met by being compassionate all around. Don't say false things, but when you speak the truth, be compassionate towards the people around it. With compassion, you can even say hard things to people and get away with it.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have some people to insult in the midst of a flame war.
Re: (Score:2)
You're an enigma, phatom. :)
But look, I'll withdraw my second post. You're right. Correct expression is (nearly) as important as working from the correct presumptions.
Re: Victim Blaming? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Scepticism is not an accusation.
Way to miss the point AC, way to miss the point.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on how you phrase it.
Doesn't it depend more on actually "wait[ing] until the evidence comes out before judging," rather then merely phrasing it so? (Depending on what 'it' is, of course).
Re: (Score:2)
Of course you are right, being a good person is better than talking nicely. Why not do both?
Re: (Score:2)
A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. --Prov 15:1
It's amazing how judgemental you can be when you phrase it kindly :)
Yes, I was left with an uneasy feeling that this might be going on here .. but as I said above, I withdraw. Looking at the totality of your contributions I find nothing to persuade me from the presumption ;) that you have anything but the best intentions in mind.
Your basic point, if I understand you, is the all too common to rush to blame the victim, even where blame is clothed in the mantle of "scepticism," (e.g. "I'm not saying you're
Re: (Score:2)
So what do you propose instead? Keep in mind that blaming the accused (before evidence or judgement is given) is basically as wrong as blaming the accuser. How do you express skepticism or withhold judgement in a way you see as correct?
It's not good enough to just say keep your mouth shut. What's the right thing to say when one of your friends states that either the accuser or the accused has done Horrible Things?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what do you propose instead? Keep in mind that blaming the accused (before evidence or judgement is given) is basically as wrong as blaming the accuser. How do you express skepticism or withhold judgement in a way you see as correct?
As you say it's "basically as wrong" to go one way or the other. I already answered this above, but to recap: What I propose is nothing more radical than adhering to the ordinary presumptions a court is required to make, for example, in a criminal process. That is to say
Re: (Score:2)
Just contradict whichever opinion is being stated? That's reasonable. Though it's a strategy rather than a universal response, so it's vulnerable to being taken out of context by dicks. Not that that matters, unless you write for a large audience or using your real name.
Re: Victim Blaming? (Score:5, Insightful)
>Victim blaming happens far less than false claims.
This is the most demonstrably false statement I've read in quite a while.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You want proof? Go read any slashdot post relating to sexual harassment. Every single one has plenty of victim blaming to go around meanwhile only a relatively small percentage were later proven as false.
Read any sexual harassment case on foxnews.com or Yahoo.
Victim blaming happens all the time, its a usual method to try and silence someone.
Re: (Score:1)
Go read any slashdot post relating to sexual harassment. Every single one has plenty of victim blaming to go around meanwhile only a relatively small percentage were later proven as false.
Emphasis added.
I agree with you, but do you see how you changed the assertion?? "small percentage is false" and "small percentage was proven false" are not equivalent statements.
Sexual harassment cases are such that proving them right OR wrong is difficult.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure you'll be more than happy to provide some data to that effect, right?
It is so obvious no rational person would need data for this, similar to needing data proving things fall when dropped. But here you go anyway.
It is nearly impossible to find out how many sexual harassment cases are unfounded, but you can get a rough idea of how many by comparing them to forcible rape statistics where there has been more investigation into false claims. According to the FBI [fbi.gov] about 8% of forcible rape cases are deemed to be unfounded. Other studies put the number closer to 2%. But even though
Re: (Score:2)
Lucky for you, then.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, and unfortunately, the more dangerous, the more Fun. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Given enough money, everything can be made better.
which car company? (Score:3)
Re:which car company? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, it's right there in the title and the third word in the summary.
That's awesome (Score:1)
Thanks Slashdot!
Wait a min... (Score:5, Interesting)
So, now after her Blog post might have caused a PR nightmare for Uber, they are apparently strong arming her by hiring a law firm to "investigate" her? This is NOT good for either party here. Lady, it's time to fie suit or apologize.
Now I have no first hand knowledge of either party, but it sure seems like Uber is convinced that she cannot substantiate her story about what happens inside Uber so they are going to legally muzzle her to stem the PR damage she's doing. My guess is Uber has determined that just letting this go and weathering the PR storm is not in their best interest, that they need to take some kind of legal action to stop this woman from making her claims. They didn't choose to settle with her, pay her to be quiet or even sue her (yet) and are willing to keep the story alive. They apparently believe they can make this stop by taking action faster than letting the news cycle run it's course.
Uber is either being uber stupid or this lady is making stuff up. I'm thinking that's it is more likely this lady is making stuff up and Uber is making legal moves to stop her from lying about them. Uber may not be totally ethical at times, but I don't think they are stupid...
One thing is sure, now that lawyers are involved on both sides, nothing good is going to happen.
Re: (Score:1)
what if she's a lying sack of shit and none of the stories she tells were true?
Re: (Score:1)
What if you spontaneously combusted?
Re: (Score:2)
this is uber.
dollars to donuts, THEY are lying.
occam would also agree...
Re:Wait a min... (Score:5, Informative)
If this was out of the blue, that might be a reasonable question.
However, Uber being a sexist and shit place to work is well known gossip in the vallet tech scene, and add to that the fact that you've got the SVP of engineering resigning last week for not disclosing his sexual harassment problems at his former employer - Google, AND there was the dashcam video of Uber's shithead CEO badgering one of his drivers. So with all of that in hand, it's not hard to see Uber as a company with a systemic problem of harassment. Plus, she states in her post that she does in fact have documentation:
" I pointed out that everything I had reported came with extensive documentation and I clearly wasn't the instigator (or even a main character) in the majority of them - she countered by saying that there was absolutely no record in HR of any of the incidents I was claiming I had reported (which, of course, was a lie, and I reminded her I had email and chat records to prove it was a lie)."
If she actually has copies of the documentation, chat logs and emails, then Uber doesn't have a pot to piss in, metaphorically speaking.
Re: (Score:2)
We going to say the same thing. Given everything we know about Uber, it's not surprising that they would do something so pretty and try to bully their way out of this.
Re: (Score:2)
She could very well be telling the truth, but you really are hilarious:
"well known gossip"
thanks for citing authoritative source.
"she states in her post"
more incontrovertible proof for sure.
your other words about how other execs at the place are douchebags isn't really relevant, all big companies have them.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but the story about the CEO and the SVP re well documented in the news, the former even on a separate /, post. As for me mentioning "in her post" I took that to mean that she'd damn well better have the mentioned backups of email and chat logs or she is very far out on a limb - as in I doubt any sane person would commit such actionable libel unless it wasn't in fact libel and can be proven. I think the fact that Uber hasn't yet sued her means there's some merit to that speculation.
Re: (Score:3)
what if she's a lying sack of shit and none of the stories she tells were true?
Simple, Then everyone involved ends up in the shit hole.
Nobody will believe Uber, because most people have concluded by now they're bastards anyway and their childish CEO doesn't help. But then anybody who actually needs to know whether they can trust her (e.g., future employers) wouldn't be quite sure about her after all the conflicting stories come out.
And they'd have to. Given the sheer magnitude of the culture of dickishness she describes (sexism is one of the many forms of dickishness she describes)
Re: (Score:3)
what if she's a lying sack of shit and none of the stories she tells were true?
Then she's about to get legally reamed by Uber, and she deserves it. Which is why I'm thinking the smart play here is to beg for mercy, unless she has a good case on Uber, in which case she needs to file suit ASAP. Remember, Uber knows the truth here or they have a pretty good idea how this would play in court (and the lowly ex-employee vrs the Big Bad Rich Company NEVER plays well in court). It sure looks like she's got nothing, but who of us knows?
For her It's put up or shut up time. Given Uber's behav
Re: (Score:2)
what if she's a lying sack of shit and none of the stories she tells were true?
There is a whole shitload of workers at Uber, men and women alike, who are saying her claims are true. Unless every motherfucker involved in this is collectivelly lying (and someone shows me proof of it), then I will assume she is not.
The nature of Uber as a company is now in the open, the CEO has just admitted it. The only way for her to lie is to be lying about *her* own harassment which would no longer contradict everything else that has come up to the open. The cat is out.
Re: (Score:2)
what if she's a lying sack of shit and none of the stories she tells were true?
Then anyone who publishes her claims will be sued for large amounts of money by Uber, I assume.
Re: (Score:2)
Libel is NOT a crime, it's a civil matter. The government isn't going to put her on trial for libel, but the entity she lied about can take her to civil court for damages. The only really part the government might play here is (apart from supplying the court) is to assist somebody in collecting a judgment.
My point here is that if she's lying, her best out now is to plead for mercy from those she harmed and try to get a settlement that doesn't ruin her professional and financial prospects further. Even i
Re: (Score:2)
Libel is NOT a crime, it's a civil matter. The government isn't going to put her on trial for libel, but the entity she lied about can take her to civil court for damages. The only really part the government might play here is (apart from supplying the court) is to assist somebody in collecting a judgment.
My point here is that if she's lying, her best out now is to plead for mercy from those she harmed and try to get a settlement that doesn't ruin her professional and financial prospects further. Even if she's not lying but doesn't have a provable claim she can file on Uber, she'd be well advised to "man up" and let this go, sooner rather than later. However, if she thinks there is enough evidence, then she needs to file suit NOW....
It's put up or shut up time.
By her claims, she has documentation, emails and chat logs, plus there is a whole bunch of other engineers testifying of similar harassment situations, with male employees also backing their female coworkers in their complaints.
So, Occam's Razor unless there is solid proof that 1) she is lying, and 2) her lies debunk the accusations brought forward by all those other engineers.
Re: (Score:2)
The "amount of evidence" is not an indicator of what it shows, but if she has what she claims, she needs to file suit.
I'm sure Uber already knows what the truth here is and they generally are going to act in their own best interest based on this knowledge. If they already know she's going to prevail, then they have two choices... Let the story die by ignoring it and hope she goes away or go on the attack and get her to shut up using legal means. You don't try the courts unless you have nothing to lose, kn
Re: (Score:2)
It's Uber who have to prove she has libelled them, not she who has to prove anything.
Re: (Score:2)
She claims she was harassed in the workplace, mistreated and otherwise had to endure their crap while employed at Uber. IF her claims are true, she has standing to sue, especially in the liberal mecca she lives. Remember that the Big Rich Uber vrs the lowly female ex-employee already slants to her favor in civil court.
But hey, I ask you, why is Uber making legal moves by retaining a law firm to investigate her? You hire a private investigator for that kind of thing, not a law firm, unless you intend to f
Re: (Score:1)
Didn't Uber previously hire private investigators to dig up dirt about the sex lives of tech reporters that criticized them? I have no idea if this woman's report is true. But I have a much easier time believing that a shit bag corporation would continue to be a shit bag corporation than this woman would choose to paint an enormous target on herself so that every jackass on every tech blog can call her a liar. And that's not even getting into harassment from the crazy MRA fringe.
Re: (Score:2)
I wish there were a betting site that could put money on this, because I know I wouldn't put a dime on uber and it could make me a rich rich man. I'd bet the house.
Indeed. People act as if this lady is/was the only person bringing accusations of harassment, and all other accusations are just a fabrication, a collective conspiracy against... I dunno... man rights or something.
Re: (Score:2)
100% of made up statistics like the one above are bullshit.
One thing's certain (Score:2)
"Alleged"? (Score:2)
Is anyone seriously disputing that she experienced sexual discrimination at Uber?
Then why the weasel words?
Re: (Score:2)
she could be a gold digger.
of course, she could be telling the truth.
but you're implying we should reach a conclusion based on emotion and "it must be true" and "it sounds right to me" without hard proven facts.
Re: (Score:1)
You're only upset with women because the only lady who'll fuck you is Palmela Handerson.
Re: (Score:2)
You're only upset with women because the only lady who'll fuck you is Palmela Handerson.
Look at this guy! He can't get laid! His opinion must be invalid!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Right... if she's just retaining a lawyer now after posting that shows some lack of planning on her part. Regardless of the truth of her claims, she had to figure that she would be charged with defamation based on the heavy claims she's made against a aggressive company.
Why? She wasn't suing them and her claims were verifiable, the logical response from Uber was ignore or apologize. A smear campaign, if that is what's happening, would be a really stupid response on their part.
It should be noted from the article that it's not even clear that someone is going after her, or if Uber is that someone. I wouldn't be surprised if some MRAs weren't taking it upon themselves to make an example of her.
Re: (Score:3)
This is a reasonable response and got modded as flamebait? Christ
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Makes you wonder exactly who has mod points today.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that. It's Slashdot's utterly broken moderation system.
For example, if I were granted mod points today, I could not mod quantaman's comment up, because I'm making this comment here and stupid Slashdot won't allow me to mod and post in the same article. I've been complaining about this for many years now, but it never changes, and probably never will because the site maintainers are stubborn and stupid, and always have been (even when they change).
Because of this stupid rule, I simply never mod an
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably for the last sentence, which shoe-horns in MRAs and accuses them of doing...something?
I probably jumped the gun, but I think it is a legitimate concern. There's a real history of women standing up against sexism in the computer industry and becoming the target of online harassment, and with the current political situation those groups are emboldened. If I were a woman I'd be very hesitant to make myself visible, I'm certain there are already people searching the Internet for personal information to discredit her.
Re: (Score:2)
She's retaining a lawyer because Uber is trying to smear her.