Poor James Damore — losing again

Some good news, at least: James Damore had charged that Google violated labor laws by firing him, claiming that he was merely providing useful internal criticism of Google’s procedures, and you can’t fire someone for that. His claim has been thrown out. It seems Google was very careful to clearly state its reasons for the firing, and it wasn’t because he was trying to improve their training methods: it was because he was bigoted and promoting discrimination. Oops.

The NLRB memo includes talking points that Google prepared and read over the phone to Damore when he was fired. “I want to make clear that our decision is based solely on the part of your post that generalizes and advances stereotypes about women versus men,” Google’s talking points stated. “I also want to be clear that this is not about you expressing yourself on political issues or having political views that are different than others at the company. Having a different political view is absolutely fine. Advancing gender stereotypes is not.”

Now Damore still pursues “a class action lawsuit in which he accuses Google of discriminating against its white, male, and conservative employees.” You might think that maybe that has a better chance of success, since he’s arguing that he’s opposing discrimination against men, but look at what Google said. They’re against “stereotypes about women versus men”. Those hurt men as well as women, so they were also careful to insulate themselves against the charge that they were favoring one sex over another.


  1. Usernames! 🦑 says

    Guy has backwards, offensive, regressive ideas

    Guy expresses those ideas in public and expects no consequences

    Guy gets fired

    Guy still thinks he was right, thus tries to “right the wrong” by complaining to government

    Government agrees Guy was fired for legitimate reason

    Guy still thinks he was right, plans lawsuit

    Guy has probably not thought this through

  2. screechymonkey says

    My recollection is that most employment lawyers who commented on this case thought that the NLRB complaint had a better chance than the discrimination lawsuit. Of course, Damore may be pursuing litigation more for the purpose of establishing himself as a hero to the Jordan Petersen crowd, in the hopes of making some money that way.

  3. doubtthat says

    I think he’s clearly making a play for the Peterson/alt-right bucks.

    What’s amusing is that he doesn’t even meet the very low charisma standards that crowd has established, and as he keeps pushing this idiotic case, he is making himself less and less employable by a normal company.

    His fame has already withered considerably, and when it’s gone, what the hell is he going to do? Wignut welfare (endless spots on Hannity’s show) is really his only avenue at this point.

  4. pita says

    You know if Damore can prove that straight white men are being systematically underpaid , underpromoted, and generally discriminated against as a class at google, then more power to him. But somehow I think any analysis he runs is going to turn up some different data lmao

  5. blf says

    [… S]omehow I think any analysis he [Damore] runs is going to turn up some different data [instead of “straight white men are being systematically underpaid, underpromoted, and generally discriminated against as a class at google”]

    Nah, any analysis he runs will probably show something like that. Analysis by competent experts is what very probably will not show that.

  6. Ishikiri says

    Damore ought to appear in dictionaries under the entry for “butthurt.” I’m sure he was just so used to everyone smiling and nodding all of his life when he shared his unsolicited, half-formed opinions. Then some other Google employees told him to fuck off and he got so upset he decided to write the anti-diversity screed that got him fired.

  7. says

    The thing about James Damore is he got precisely what he asked for. He didn’t want to have to work alongside women and non-white people, and now he isn’t working alongside women and non-white people.

    As the old saying goes: be careful what you ask for; you may receive it.

  8. freemage says

    From the National Archives’ EEO terminology site, for “protected class”:

    These groups include men and women on the basis of sex; any group which shares a common race, religion, color, or national origin; people over 40; and people with physical or mental handicaps.

    Note that “political affiliation” is nowhere on it. Simply including the term “conservative” means Damore has doomed this case from the outset–because he admits he cannot show any sort of discrimination SOLELY on race/gender lines.

  9. a_ray_in_dilbert_space says

    Ishikiri: “I’m sure he was just so used to everyone smiling and nodding all of his life when he shared his unsolicited, half-formed opinions.”

    But the argument sounded so reasonable when he wrote it by the light of a burning cross!

Leave a Reply