Google elevates male sexual harassers at the cost of women.
A New York Times article sparked a fire at Google. 20,000 employees walked out of their offices all over the world in November. They were protesting Google’s bad habit of rewarding men who sexually harassed or assaulted women at the company. Andy Rubin, the “father of Android,” was the most well known recipient of Google’s compensation. The man sexually harassed female employees at Google, including a sex slavery contract he would work up with women where he’d pay to “own” them. He’d share his “owned women” with friends.
Google, upon finding out about this, likely asked Andy Rubin to resign. They gave him a $90 million severance package and sent him on his way with well wishes. He used that to go on to found Essential Phone, something he may not have been able to do without Google’s pat on the back. He’s not alone. Rubin was one of three men, including Richard DeVaul, Amit Singhal, and David C. Drummond. All received money and well wishes upon their departures, despite the fact that they were likely asked to resign over sexual harassment.
Alphabet (Google’s parent company) shareholder James Martin filed a lawsuit against Google on behalf of the shareholders. He claims that Google’s lax treatment of sexual abusers enabled the behavior at the company. Furthermore, he blames the board of directors for giving payouts to these abusers, and wants Google to do more to prevent harassment in the future. He also wants Google’s money back. Two groups on behalf of pension funds at Google have also sued. Google is facing three lawsuits for propping up abusers.
Time’s up, Google, time to “Do the right thing.”
What the Lawsuit Entails
Google’s own employees protesting the company. Photo: James Martin/CNET
Companies have certain obligations to their shareholders. These people should have a say in how the company runs, and, therefore, should have information they want on the company. Because Google did not make their shareholders aware of sexual harassment cases against their top employees, and because the company dismissed them with huge severance packages, these lawsuits argue that Google acted inappropriately and illegally. They cut into company funds for severance packages they shouldn’t have paid.
Furthermore, Google’s actions hurt the company’s reputation. Their forgiving nature of dealing with sexual harassment lead to a company-wide walkout. It was possibly the largest company protest in history. This did serious damage to Google’s ability to get and retain talent, especially female talent, and it hurt Google in the minds of consumers. These are difficult metrics to measure, but are the most likely effects of Google’s blasé attitude towards sexual assault.
Finally, Google has opened itself up to lawsuits. The women who worked for Google and were sexually harassed by employees that Google either allowed to continue working at the company or sent off with a huge severance are owed something. They could still sue.
If this lawsuit sounds as though it’s all about the money, that’s because it is. There’s one way to change the way business is done at a company: hit them in the bottom line. The people pushing these lawsuits may have aspirations outside of financial concerns. In fact, looking at what they want from Google, it’s clear they want to make the place a better company for women and hold them accountable.
What Google Can Do
James Martin’s lawsuit on behalf of Alphabet shareholders has suggested actions for the company. First, they want the sexual abusers who were pushed out of the company to repay their severances. For Andy Rubin, this would be $90 million. It’s a small amount to Google’s bottom line, but sends a message to the would-be harassers at Google: there’s no golden parachute for you.
The lawsuit asks for reform, terminating employees and board members when an assault or harassment victim comes forward with a credible complaint. This would require improved reporting. In order to keep shareholders from being in the dark, Google would have to improve transparency, ending non-disclosure agreements for these harassment terminations.
Martin also wants to end Google’s tiered voting system. This would take some power away from Google’s co-founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin. However, it would put more power in the hands of shareholders. Martin believes this would be good, taking power away from the old guard that allowed this harassment to not only go unpunished, but to see rewards. This would coincide with up to three new board members, elected by non-management shareholders. This is again to reduce the power of the board members and managers who have been a part of the problem at Google.
Will Google Change?
The classic I/O symbol reimagined as the female symbol.
Google ended forced arbitration, that is, forcing harassment victims to keep their cases in-house. However, Google has fought protesters on most of their demands. They haven’t released sexual harassment transparency reports, fired executives that made these decisions, promoted the role of the Chief Diversity Officer, allowed anonymous reporting of sexual harassment, or dedicated itself to improving pay equality, transparency, and equal opportunity within the company. When it comes to change, Google takes the slow and easy route, protecting harassers and the people who protected them. They’ve done little to improve their toxic atmosphere, despite lawsuits from the U.S. government and many former employees. Google won’t change until they become a pariah in tech. They may be well on their way.
If abuse victims can take down a giant like Harvey Weinstein, surely they can do the same to a giant bully like Google.
You can read James Martin’s full lawsuit here.
Sources:
- Casey Newton, The Verge
- Melia Russell, San Francisco Chronicle