Essential's Andy Rubin takes leave of absence after 'inappropriate relationship' allegatio...
Essential head and former Android chief Andy Rubin is taking a "leave of absence" after allegations of an "inappropriate relationship" at Google have resurfaced.
An investigation published by The Information on Tuesday delves into a situation where Rubin was in a relationship with a subordinate. Allegedly, the woman worked in the Android division with Rubin -- and the relationship violated Google policy which required that the couple report the relationship so they can be assigned to different divisions.
The report cites three people "familiar with the matter." However, the specific nature of the complaint filed by the woman weren't detailed by the sources.
However, the accounts did note that Rubin was both made aware of the investigation, as well as conclusions discussed with Rubin in 2014. Rubin was reportedly told that his behavior not only violated company policy, but was "improper and showed bad judgement" according to The Information.
Rubin left Google in 2014, reportedly shortly after the investigation concluded. Publicly, Rubin left because he was frustrated at the time it would take to advance Google's robotics department.
"Any relationship that Mr. Rubin had while at Google was consensual," Rubin spokeman Mike Sitrick told The Information. "Mr. Rubin was never told by Google that he engaged in any misconduct while at Google and he did not, either while at Google or since."
Rubin's leave of absence is said to be for "personal reasons" unrelated to the report.
Rubin's Essential Phone was announced on May 30. It shipped on Aug. 25 with generally positive reviews, but extraordinarily poor repairability, far worse than that of the iPhone.
At launch, the phone cost $699. The retail price has been cut to $499 since and was universally on sale for $399 on Cyber Monday. Early purchasers were given the opportunity to get a $200 "friends and family" code to be used on other Essential products.
An investigation published by The Information on Tuesday delves into a situation where Rubin was in a relationship with a subordinate. Allegedly, the woman worked in the Android division with Rubin -- and the relationship violated Google policy which required that the couple report the relationship so they can be assigned to different divisions.
The report cites three people "familiar with the matter." However, the specific nature of the complaint filed by the woman weren't detailed by the sources.
However, the accounts did note that Rubin was both made aware of the investigation, as well as conclusions discussed with Rubin in 2014. Rubin was reportedly told that his behavior not only violated company policy, but was "improper and showed bad judgement" according to The Information.
Rubin left Google in 2014, reportedly shortly after the investigation concluded. Publicly, Rubin left because he was frustrated at the time it would take to advance Google's robotics department.
"Any relationship that Mr. Rubin had while at Google was consensual," Rubin spokeman Mike Sitrick told The Information. "Mr. Rubin was never told by Google that he engaged in any misconduct while at Google and he did not, either while at Google or since."
Rubin's leave of absence is said to be for "personal reasons" unrelated to the report.
Rubin's Essential Phone was announced on May 30. It shipped on Aug. 25 with generally positive reviews, but extraordinarily poor repairability, far worse than that of the iPhone.
At launch, the phone cost $699. The retail price has been cut to $499 since and was universally on sale for $399 on Cyber Monday. Early purchasers were given the opportunity to get a $200 "friends and family" code to be used on other Essential products.
Comments
Or... It was all just consensual events that happen when people spend lots of time together and does it really matter?
The google guys are scumbags and not because of some consensual relationships.
This diversity is part of what made the original Macintosh team so effective, and Jobs touted their unique backgrounds. Many of them weren't what we'd call formally educated software people and probably couldn't even get hired at Apple today, let alone work on a new rockstar project.
The irony in doing it to get laid.
Like my friend once said “those store fashion dolls are better than women. You don’t have to pay child support!”
CONSENSUAL. The article says it right there.
Dont tell me you’re one of those feminists who want to classify staring and farting as “rape”.(these feminist classifications actually exist)
Men get sexually harassed all the time and if they complain? They’re told to “DEAL WITH IT” or “man up”. Look up the story on the Amazing Atheist who was sexually harassed OPENLY at work and they called him “gay” for complaining.
In what world does a women complaining cost HER her job? Because every article, news story and reality shows the man gets fired and the woman is let off scot-free.
A few years back I was in a consensual relationship with someone I worked with. It was not against company policy, so there were no issues. But FYI, she was the one who made the advances and pursued the relationship. I'm sure the majority of the time that is not the case, but I think we need to remember that when it comes to consensual workplace relationships, it takes two to tango.
I recognize that a hierarchical power differential can blur the lines between consensual and nonconsensual. But the common corporate HR "zero-tolerance" policy regarding consensual relationships seems needlessly heavy handed. Forcing someone to move to a different division of a company -- most likely into a role that they would not have otherwise chosen and is not as good of a fit as the one they were in -- seems like a real "cut off the nose to spite the face" kind of policy. It's bad for the employees who are allegedly being "protected" and it's bad for the company.
I think a better solution would be to approach this sort of thing on a case-by-case basis, guided by some overarching principles, and then do what seems to make the most sense in each case. This would require some thoughtful consideration on the part of management, which is perhaps why it doesn't happen more often. Many managers want all their employees to be interchangeable pawns on the big management chessboard. They are loathe to actually *manage* anything.
And yeah -- maybe approaching things case-by-case means dealing with a few more lawsuits, but the optimal number of lawsuits is not zero.
Now I'm talking about direct supervisor-subordinate relationships. Less direct relationships are easier to compensate for (e.g., if I'm dating someone who works for a peer of mine), with proper controls.
I’ve never seen a single case where the woman is fired for being sexually harassed.
Yet we see men fired for just about any complaint a woman makes like the game developers who were fired for making a dongle joke amongst themselves. The woman happened to overhear the joke and got them both fired.
ridiculous.
https://youtu.be/Lug2S0HzY40
It’s Rubin’s “Spokesman” who claimed the relationship was consensual...
whether male or female, that is a lopsided relationship with power dynamics that are really bad for the other person and the department. That is all.
And can you believe he got 5 likes for being off topic and bashing men?
goes to show we have a long way to go for equality when men are afraid they’ll lose their jobs if they don’t like an anti-male comment. LOL
I bet those likes were weak beta-males hoping it gets them laid or married men who have their wives hand wrapped around their fragile throats.
Someone here actually made the ridiculous comment saying “What woman would file a complaint against a man and have her character damaged” on a freaking article that damages the man’s character and doesn’t mention ANY females, at all! Literally only mentions the man. And you guessed it... it had a ton of likes.
It’s ridiculous. These people will say the opposite of the truth to not offend the women they worship.