"Tech companies, despite their public stances to the contrary, are far from apolitical actors. Google, for example, sought to forbid political discussion^14 at work until the National Labor Relations Board forced them to allow such discussions.^15 Earlier this year, Wayfair staff walked out in protest of the company's contract to sell furniture to immigrant detention centers and, in response, its CEO, said he'd like staff that join the company to be non-political.^16"
Above is a quote from the guide released by Mozilla.
Some readers might be confused by the Mozilla organization when trying to reconcile its public statements with its own corporate behaviour.
Given the concerns some folks apparently have about Google, e.g., privacy, AI, harassment, etc., according to the Mozilla guide, consider this hypothetical.
What if a company's staff were concerned about their employer having a major contract with Google. What should they do?
Should they walk out? What if their salaries are paid indirectly by Google, i.e., almost all of their employer's revenue comes from the Google contract?
Mozilla Corporation derives almost all of its revenue from a contract with Google. Executive salaries are funded from Google payments, with lesser payments from Baidu and Yandex for the Chinese and Russian markets, respectively.
According to one report, without the deals it makes with search engines, Mozilla could not survive for very long.
Mozilla Foundation purports to be fighting for user choice and privacy. At the same time Mozilla is automatically sending web search queries to Google, by default, without requesting user consent, in exchange for hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties.
>Google, for example, sought to forbid political discussion at work until the National Labor Relations Board forced them to allow such discussions.
Why is this the NLRB's business? As I recall, the controversy at Google was because some guy published a manifesto on the company's internal communications systems, and this caused a lot of arguments on those internal chat boards. I don't really see why Google doesn't have a right to police their internal employee communication systems and keep them from devolving into political arguments. Their systems, their rules.
This wasn't about a few employees having a conversation at the water cooler; this was about internally-used social media systems that everyone in the company could see. What employees say in small-group or private conversation is one thing, but I don't see how Google is obligated to give employees a platform to spout their political views in front of the entire company. Most other companies don't do any such thing.
"... I don't see how Google is obligated to give employees a platform to spout their political views in front of the entire company."
When they settled with the NRLB, Google said in their press releases that the agreement made no mention of politics.
The terms of the settlement required Google to clarify its policies on employees exchanging information related to compensation and organising, not its position on employees expressing political views.
Above is a quote from the guide released by Mozilla.
Some readers might be confused by the Mozilla organization when trying to reconcile its public statements with its own corporate behaviour.
Given the concerns some folks apparently have about Google, e.g., privacy, AI, harassment, etc., according to the Mozilla guide, consider this hypothetical.
What if a company's staff were concerned about their employer having a major contract with Google. What should they do?
Should they walk out? What if their salaries are paid indirectly by Google, i.e., almost all of their employer's revenue comes from the Google contract?
Mozilla Corporation derives almost all of its revenue from a contract with Google. Executive salaries are funded from Google payments, with lesser payments from Baidu and Yandex for the Chinese and Russian markets, respectively.
According to one report, without the deals it makes with search engines, Mozilla could not survive for very long.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-14/google-pa...
https://www.zdnet.com/article/can-firefox-survive/
https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/14/mozilla-terminates-its-dea...
Mozilla Foundation purports to be fighting for user choice and privacy. At the same time Mozilla is automatically sending web search queries to Google, by default, without requesting user consent, in exchange for hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties.