♪♪
NEIL: JAMES DEM MORE LOST.
HE WAS FIRED AT GOOGLE FOR
SIMPLY HE SAID EXPRESSING HIS
POINT OF VIEW, A CONSERVATIVE
POINT OF VIEW WHICH HE OUTLINED
TO SOME OF HIS COLLEAGUES AT
WORK THAT GOOGLE WAS BEING
UNFAIR, QUESTIONED THE ROLE OF
BIOLOGY AND CAREER CHOICES AND
SOME LEFT OF CENTER BIASES THAT
PUT CONSERVATIVE WORKERS IN SOME
PERIL.
THE CASE WAS BROUGHT TO THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
AND IT WAS THERE THAT THE NLRB
DECIDED HE DIDN'T HAVE A CASE,
THAT GOOGLE DID.
THAT HIS COMMENTS BORDERED ON
DISCRIMINATORY, THAT IS WHY HE
WAS CANNED.
JAMES DAMORE IS HERE AND HIS
ATTORNEY.
WELCOME TO YOU BOTH.
I APPRECIATE IT.
>> HAPPY TO BE HERE, NEIL.
NEIL: LET'S GET TO THIS A LITTLE
BIT BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH TO
GET INTO.
AND, JAMES, THE FIRST THING,
THIS STARTED WITH YOU DISCUSSING
AMONG YOUR COLLEAGUES POINTS OF
VIEW THAT WERE OPPOSED TO WHAT?
THE WAY GOOGLE HIRED THE RESULTS
OF THAT HIRING, POLITICAL
CORRECTNESS, HOW WOULD YOU
DESCRIBE IT?
>> IT WAS PARTLY JUST THE
SHAMING WITHIN CULTURE, WITHIN
THE CULTURE, AND ALSO
DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES IN
HIRING.
NEIL: NOW, THERE YOU OUTLINED
BIOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
MEN AND WOMEN, WHY THEY WERE SO
FEW FEMALE EMPLOYEES OF EQUAL
STATURE TO MALE EMPLOYEES.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS
AT A LOT OF COMPANIES.
17% OF THE WORKFORCE AT GOOGLE
HAD WOMEN IN SUCH POSITIONS WHEN
IT CAME TO LEADERSHIP.
FEWER THAN ONE IN FIVE ARE
WOMEN.
HOW DID YOU ADDRESS THAT OR WHAT
DID YOU SAY ABOUT THAT BECAUSE
THE COMPANY SAYS THAT YOU
IMPLIED THAT WOMEN WEREN'T UP TO
THAT TASK BIOLOGICALLY?
>> I SIMPLY USED THE
PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH TO
EXPLAIN WHY THERE MAY BE FEWER
WOMEN INTERESTED IN CURRENT TECH
JOBS AND HOW WE COULD CHANGE THE
JOBS MORE WELCOMING TO MORE
WOMEN.
NEIL: IN SAYING THAT, YOU
BROUGHT UP, YOU WRITE VERY WELL,
VERY CLEAR BUT YOU CITE AMONG
OTHER REASONS THAT WOMEN MIGHT
NOT HAVE THE TEMPERMENT FOR
MOVING BEYOND -- HIGHER ANXIETY,
LOWER STRESS TOLERANCE.
THIS MAY CONTRIBUTE TO THE
HIGHER LEVELS OF ANXIETY THAT
WOMEN REPORT AND THAT LOWER
NUMBER OF WOMEN IN HIGHER
STRESSED JOBS.
A LOT OF WOMEN GOT UPSET WITH
THAT.
THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY A
DEAL-CHANGER FOR GOOGLE.
WHAT DO YOU SAY WHEN THEY
QUESTIONED YOU ABOUT THAT?
>> THIS IS A WELL-FOUNDED
FINDING IN PSYCHOLOGY THAT WOMEN
REPORT HIGHER LEVELS OF STRESS
ON SURVEYS AND GOOGLE WAS USING
THAT AS EVIDENCE THAT WOMEN WERE
BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST.
I SIMPLY WANTED TO SHOW THAT,
NO, WOMEN TEND TO EXPERIENCE
MORE STRESS AND IF WE MAKE THE
JOB JUST LESS STRESSFUL, LESS
80-HOUR WEEKS WE CAN MAKE IT
JUST MORE APPEALING TO MORE
WOMEN.
NEIL: ALL RIGHT.
WELL HERE IS THE CHANCE I WANT
TO TALK TO YOUR FEMALE LAWYER.
AND MAYBE, YOU CAN HELP ME WITH
THIS, BECAUSE WHEN THE COMPANY
CEO WAS ASKED ABOUT THIS DURING,
I THINK THE DAVOS SUMMIT, HE
SAID AS A COMPANY WE SUPPORT
FREEDOM OF SPEECH BUT YOU HAVE
TO UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT OF THE
WORK PLACE, THE REPRESENTATION
OF WOMEN IS VERY, VERY LOW, IT
IS MORAL IMPERATIVE WE CREATE A
ENVIRONMENT MORE SUPPORTIVE OF
WOMEN HE WENT ON TO SAY THIS WAS
NOT A BIOLOGICAL ISSUE.
THIS WAS A FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE.
THE POINTS THAT YOUR CLIENT WAS
MAKING DEEMED, WERE DEEMED TO BE
DISCHROMER TO.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> WELL, NEIL, THERE'S NO
DENYING THAT THERE ARE
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEN AND
WOMEN.
SO I THINK THAT IS A LEGITIMATE
POINT.
A LOT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIORS
IN THE WORK PLACE AND OUTSIDE
DON'T WANT TO ACCEPT THAT NOW
THE QUESTION IS HOW DO COMPANIES
DEAL WITH IT?
JAMES WAS TRYING TO PROVIDE
CONSTRUCTIVE SOLUTIONS.
WHAT GOOGLE DOES, WHAT MANY
COMPANIES DO, EMPLOY QUOTAS
MANDATE HIRING OF WOMEN, DESPITE
THE FACT POOP LINE COMING OUT OF
OUR ENGINEERING INSTITUTIONS IS
20% WOMEN.
WE NEED TO CHANGE CHA AS SOCIETY
IF WE WANT MORE WOMEN TO HAVE
THE JOBS.
QUOTAS ARE ILLEGAL UNDER
EMPLOYMENT LAWS.
WHILE GOOGLE MAY PREFER AND HAVE
WHAT THEY CALL MORAL I WILL PAIR
TIFF THEY MUST -- IMPERATIVE.
THEY MUST ABIDE BY EMPLOYMENT
LAW.
THERE ARE EMPLOYMENT
DISCRIMINATION LAWS THAT PROTECT
THE RIGHTS OF WORKERS TO COMMENT
ABOUT THESE ISSUES AND TO NOT BE
DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ON THE
BASIS OF THEIR GENDER, THEIR
RACE, THEIR --
NEIL: OR THEIR VIEWS, RIGHT.
>> OR SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
OR THEIR VIEWPOINT.
NEIL: JAMES, IF YOU BELIEVED IT
WAS YOUR CONSERVATIVE VIEWPOINT
WHAT IS DEEMED TO BE A LIBERAL
WORKING ENVIRONMENT, THAT WORKED
AGAINST YOU, DID YOU HAVE ANY
OTHER INSTANCES OF THAT WHERE
YOU FELT OSTRACIZED OR YOU WERE
LAUGHED AT, PICKED ON?
I KNOW, THE COMPANY DID HAVE TO
RESPOND TO AN EMAILER WHO HAD
THREATENED BUT DID IT GO BEYOND
THAT?
>> THERE WERE MANY INSTANCES OF
SHAMING WITHIN OUR CULTURE.
IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE LAWSUIT
THERE IS HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF
THIS JUST REPEATED OVER AND
I WASN'T AN ISOLATED INCIDENT.
NEIL: ARE THERE OTHER
CONSERVATIVE OR RIGHT-LEANING
FIGURES LIKE YOURSELF OR WORKERS
WHO ARE AFRAID TO SPEAK UP AND
WHAT IS CONDONED VERSUS WHAT IS
NOT CONDONED?
>> SO, RECENT SURVEYS SUGGEST
ABOUT 80% OF CONSERVATIVES FEEL
LIKE THEY CAN'T BRING UP SOCIAL
ISSUES AT WORK IN SILICON
VALLEY.
IT IS REALLY UNCLEAR WHAT
EXACTLY YOU CAN OR CAN'T SAY
WHICH ADDS TO THE CHILLING
EFFECT.
NEIL: SO, WHEN YOU SAID YOU
COULDN'T COME THROUGH WITH YOUR
VIEWS BUT YOU STILL WROTE WHAT
YOU WROTE AND SHARED WITH YOUR
COLLEAGUES WHAT YOU SHARED WITH
YOUR COLLEAGUES, DID YOU EVER
BOUNCE IT OFF YOUR SUPERIORS
FIRST?
>> YEAH.
I ACTUALLY HAD MANY ONE-ON-ONE
CONVERSATIONS.
A MANAGER ACTUALLY SUGGESTED
THAT I SPREAD IT FURTHER.
SO, IT WASN'T CLEAR THAT THIS
WAS WRONG AT ALL.
IT WAS ONLY ONCE IT BECAME VIRAL
THAT THE COMPANY STARTED
RESPONDING AND DEANNOUNCING ME.
NEIL: ALL RIGHT.
SO THE COMPANY WAS SAYING AT THE
TIME IT ACTED AS IT DID, THIS IS
SOMETHING ECHOED BY THE NATIONAL
LABOR RELATIONS BOARD TO MAKE
THE DECISION THAT IT DID,
EMPLOYERS MUST BE PERMITTED TO
NIP IN THE BUD, I THINK THAT
WOULD BE YOU THE KIND OF
EMPLOYEE CONDUCT THAT COULD LEAD
TO HOSTILE WORK PLACE, RATHER
THAN WAITING UNTIL AN ACTIONABLE
HOSTILE WORK PLACE IS CREATED
BEFORE TAKING ACTION.
IN OTHER WORDS IF YOUR VIEWS
WERE LEFT TO GO UNADDRESSED AND
BY EXTENSION MAKE WOMEN IN THIS
CASE FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE, THEN
THAT'S REASON ENOUGH FOR TO YOU
GO.
WHAT DO YOU SAY?
>> SO, NEIL, IF I COULD ADDRESS
THE ISSUE ABOUT THE NATION LABOR
RELATIONS BOARD.
FIRST OF ALL, JAMES, WITHDRAW
HIS NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
CHARGE, WE FOCUSED ON THE
CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT.
THAT IS ONE MISCONSTRUCTION.
NEIL: THEY BOTH CAME TO THE SAME
VIEW.
>> THEY REALLY DON'T ACTUALLY.
THEY REALLY DON'T ACTUALLY.
THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
BOARD, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
ACT HAS A LIMITED SCOPE.
WHAT IS COVERED THERE, CONCERTED
PROTECTED ACTIVITY.
IN OUR LAWSUIT WE TALK ABOUT
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT NORMS NOT
COVERED BY THE NATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS ACT.
LONGSTANDING PRECEDENT IN THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ABILITY
CONDUCT LIKE JAILS IS WAS
PROTECTED.
AT REGIONAL LITTLE IN
SAN FRANCISCO AREA THE NATIONAL
LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DECIDED TO
WHO HAVE FORWARD WITH JAMES'S
CASE.
WE HAD ONE LAWYER IN THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
WHO WROTE THIS MEMO, IT IS AN
ADVICE MEMO, NOT A RULING, THERE
WAS NO EVIDENT TAKEN, THERE WAS
IN HEARING, NOBODY WAS SWORN.
INTERESTING THEY RELEASED THE
THING MONTH AFTER THEY WROTE IT.
JAMES DOESN'T HAVE A CASE IN
FRONT OF THE NATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS BOARD ANYMORE.
IT WAS ODD AND GRATUITOUS TO DO
THAT.
GOOGLE DIDN'T LOBBY THEM TO