undefined | Better HN

0 pointszaksoup5y ago0 comments

If somebody used HR as the mechanism to communicate feedback on the scientific rigor of research I was leading I would also find that concerning and objectionable. Human Resources is not peer review.

0 comments

that_guy_iain5y ago

Honestly, if someone had to use HR to give feedback on anything, I would be more concerned as to why they couldn't say it directly to me.

HR wouldn't have made the final decision here, it seems other departments did. HR was just how someone felt it was safe to communicate that feedback, which for me is a major issue in a workplace.

zaksoupOP5y ago

I think there's a place for HR to help somebody give feedback about social or work-style issues. If somebody has a track record of getting defensive with face-to-face feedback it might be useful to have a manager present as a mediator and go through a formal process.

That's just not the same as giving scientific feedback in the review process for research and shouldn't be in the way there.

that_guy_iain5y ago

I think you're missing the massive point that someone thought that doing it in a non-anonymous way would have resulted in retribution. That is not defensive, it's offensive. You seem to be missing the fact that the woman seems quite happy to try and bury people over seemed transgressions.

Someone thought they HAD to goto HR to provide the feedback because no other way was safe. If you want to act about the scientifc review process, that should never happen and when it does there should be serious action taken.

fuzzylightbulb5y ago

What if you were the sort of person with a very public history of suing your employer? Could you understand then why they might be very formal when dealing with you, especially when needing to deliver news you'd likely not be a fan of?

zaksoupOP5y ago

I don't really see how that's relevant to the specific issue of scientific rigor, and in this case is a strangely one-sided issue. as Dr. Gebru pointed out, soon after she took steps towards legal action against google (I don't think a suit was actually filed) she was also given an award by Google for her work and performance.

Also, it's strange to be giving google so much benefit of the doubt here. On the same day this happened the NLRB filed two formal complaints against google for retaliatory firing practices. If any participant in this drama has a known record of retaliatory and unfair labor practices, it is google, as documented by the federal government's extremely detailed complaint.

fooker5y ago

I would have routed feedback through HR if and only if I would have feared retaliation.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

that_guy_iain5y ago

Honestly, if someone had to use HR to give feedback on anything, I would be more concerned as to why they couldn't say it directly to me.

HR wouldn't have made the final decision here, it seems other departments did. HR was just how someone felt it was safe to communicate that feedback, which for me is a major issue in a workplace.

zaksoupOP5y ago

That's just not the same as giving scientific feedback in the review process for research and shouldn't be in the way there.

that_guy_iain5y ago

fuzzylightbulb5y ago

zaksoupOP5y ago

fooker5y ago

I would have routed feedback through HR if and only if I would have feared retaliation.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse