“Google issued a stern warning to its employees, with the company’s vice president of global security, Chris Rackow, saying, “If you’re one of the few who are tempted to think we’re going to overlook conduct that violates our policies, think again,” according to an internal memo obtained by CNBC.”

  • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    2 months ago

    Isn’t it illegal to fire protesting workers? At least here in Germany its illegal as far as I know. But it must be a protest event (which it seems to be).

    • Toes♀@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      82
      ·
      2 months ago

      My understanding is that in America, you’re only allowed to protest in ways that don’t interfere with capital interests.

        • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          2 months ago

          South Park would probably be on the side of Google and other corporations, Matt and Trey are diehard libertarian capitalists.

          • livus@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            2 months ago

            I never really forgave them for the original ManBearPig climat change denialism.

            • Hazzia@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              2 months ago

              Even though the eventually admitted their mistake with the whole “ManBearPig is real” episode, the damage had been done years prior. I haven’t watched many recent South Park episodes, but I hope they learned their lesson to maybe not ignore actual scientists next time.

              • livus@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                If it had happened like in the 1980s or something it would have been forgiveable but it was like 2006, at that point we all already knew climate change was real.

                • anachronist@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  2000s were peak libertarian for SP. They were against the war on terror so they didn’t code “Bush-right” but they were extremely libertarian. I remember the media trying to push this “millennials are conservative actually” line by inventing the phrase “South-park republican”

                  Still I remember them landing some good observations. For instance, in one episode the boys learn how veal is made and become animal rights activists. You can tell TP/MS are not animal rights activists, but after the boys steal the cows the media, police, government, etc all instantly start calling the boys “terrorists.” It really caught the whole post-9/11 zeitgeist of “anybody you don’t like is a terrorist.”

          • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’d recommend to watch later episodes. They’ve pretty much abandoned the 90s libertarian edge-lord moments and explicitly disclaimed and apologized for it. They’ve had quite a few “wow, we were the problem” fourth-wall-breaking moments in recent years.

      • quatschkopf34@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes, I don‘t think such protests would fall under the general protesting laws as they have nothing to do with your working conditions.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 months ago

      Oh no, here in America we have FREEDOM. the freedom to work! We have something called “right to work” which means we have the RIGHTS to work and quit a job with no contracts. We also gave up every single worker protection for these supposed rights, but since it was named right to work we are meant to believe it’s good for us

      • Whimseymimple@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think you’re talking about “at-will” employment, which allows the employer or employee to terminate employment for no reason at any time. Only Montana doesn’t have that (unfortunately for the rest of us), and employers must show good cause for termination after a set probationary period. “Right-to-work” means that you can’t be required to join a union or pay fair share fees as a requirement of employment. 26 states have this on the books.

        I live in a state with both laws, and it sucks as much as you’d imagine… (mainly because it’s fairly indicative of other issues throughout the state).

      • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You’re confusing At-Will employment with Right-to-Work.

        Right to work laws make it illegal to require union membership for employment at a place with a union.

        At-Will Employment makes it legal for the employee or employer to terminate employment at-will.

        They’re both bad, you just got them mixed up. :)

      • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        That is not at all what right to work means.

        I get the frustration, but if you’re going to criticize a thing, it’s a lot more effective if you actually know what the thing is.