Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Is it just me or are those both terrible overreactions from the companies' sides?

No it's not just you, the responses from the companies were, as far as I'm concerned, illegal; the guy was fired for something he said (freedom of speech?), and she was fired through 4chan blackmailing her employer (as far as I could tell).

Of course, I don't know what kind of employee protection people have; IIRC the IT business isn't unionised yet, so there's little to fall back on. Well, besides the internets, which is what caused kind of a giant backlash.




Freedom of speech only apply to the state. The state cannot restrict your freedom of speech. Your employer can.


And by making more and more communication channels "corporate" the government can wash their hands...


But there are laws against unlawful termination. What his company did could be considered unlawful termination.


I thought that here in the US only applied to a specific list of disallowed reasons (race/gender/etc). Which don't include "being targeted by the Internet Lynch Mob".


It depends on your contract. If it guarantees employment and you're not an at-will employee, the contract will state reasons for why your employment can be terminated. It's possible that the contract might include "being targeted by the Internet Lynch Mob" as one of the reasons, but I doubt it.


People actually use those (employment contracts) here?


I so far worked as an at-will employee, but some of the positions I'm interviewing for are explicitly 6 month or 12 month contracts.


Maybe so. I think this could be made more confusing if he was at the conference while on the company dime.


> Of course, I don't know what kind of employee protection people have

It's the US, and it's tech. So "none whatsoever" is about right.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: