I've never found it a good tactic to tell the boss what to do. It can lead to an entry in an employee folder that contains the words "for cause".
Oracle chairman and CTO Larry Ellison is planning to hold a fundraiser at his California estate in Rancho Mirage on February 19 to help re-elect US President Donald Trump. Some of his morally outraged underlings have published an online petition to convince the billionaire to "uphold company ethics." The database giant, known …
In California and other "at will" employment States, only stupid bosses let people go "for cause" as then you need one. In an "at will" State, you lay people off instead and don't need a justification beyond "your services are no longer required".
As a boss myself, it's a great way to get rid of low performers without having to waste inordinate amounts of time formally documenting the low performance.
I do wonder how this company keeps going.
They shaft their customer (even those that have no wish to be but get caught by swinging Java licencing), they shaft their employees, the belittle everyone and yet Larry keeps getting richer. There is nothing right about it. Or am I missing something like they have a really good product (hidden somewhere I know nothing about)?
Oracle DB actually was (maybe still is?) a really good product. The problem is the way they gouged and treated their customers, a lot of them simply decided that it wasn’t worth hassle and they’d rather just use something not quite as good.
One of their oldest tricks was to tell all features on by default if you used the GUI DB creation wizard, it would automatically enable all premium features. That way when they’d come to audit you, “oh look, you have this $100k feature enabled (but probably aren’t even actively using), and with pay charges we could take you to court for $500k. How about you just pay us $200k now and we’ll forget this indiscretion?”. Knowledgeable DBAs knew about this, which is one reason Oracle DBs got paid so much (that and only they really knew what the cryptic error messages REALLY meant!).
It was a good product in 2000.
Right now, it is obsolete, slow, etc.
There are many reasons to still use it.. but it is way too expensive for what it is.. using a supported version of postgresql is way cheaper and you get more for your money... plus you can also design products not to use Oracle but rather way faster alternatives... if you know what you are doing.
As with all benchmarks, I suspect it depends upon your definition. Postgres can certainly handle 50 TB databases and in many circumstances 50 TPS. However, it is has historically been considered to be slower than Oracle or DB2 but things have changed a lot over the last few years.
I remember a presentation by Swarm 64 about wanting to write around 32 MB/s into Postgres – okay you need an FPGA to do this but for people who need that kind of performance that's less of an issue that the Oracle licences might be.
There's now a thriving support eco-system for Postgres with companies like Enterprise DB and Second Quadrant providing support for larger projects. Enterprise DB is specialised on Oracle to Postgres migrations including support for PL/SQL which can be a bigger hindrance to migration than anything else. But also now all the major "cloud" provides have good support for Postgres so scaling is less daunting than it used to be.
What happened to the US democracy and freedom of speech? It appears that according to the mainstream press only certain loud mouth parts of the population have those rights and the rest have to remain silent. I'm sorry, but it isn't supposed to work that way.
Freedom of speech means that you have the right to your political and religious views and cannot be pursued for them by the government.
It does not mean that you have the right to say anything you want, nor do you have the right to do so anywhere you please.
Actually this is pretty much on the money. The first amendment protects speech from the government, but unless it puts you in a protected class (and even then usually within a narrow definition) it doesn't protect you from actions by private entities in response to what you say.
In this case they're arguing his comments violate his employment contract at the company by going against the ethics standards, which if true would make it entirely legal for the company to take action against him (either internal disciplinary action or legal action if that isn't possible for some reason)
It sounds like he's using his own money, and doing it in his own time, so it's really nothing to do with his employer.
Of course, if he did something like, (eg), using the company private jet to fly out there, that would be a different matter.
If your boss wants to be a scumbag on his own time, there's nothing you can do. Except quit and go work for someone you do respect of course.
You appear to be completely missing the point. Oracle employees have absolutely no right to determine what Ellison says and Ellison is free to say what he likes and support who he likes, as long as he isn't breaking any very specific legal exceptions (shouting fire in a crowded theater etc...) Nobody is obliged to listen to him of course.
I think we are all missing the point here. It's not about freedom of speech. This is about not doing something you told everyone you're not going to do (in your code of ethics).
However, on skimming though the document, it doesn't actually seem to prohibit what he is doing. It bands pressuring someone to vote a particular way or to contribute to a cause. You can't use company resources without running it past the legal department. You can't do politics on company time or expenses. You can't bribe a politician to win a contract.
So unless, I'm missing something, or Larry hasn't told his legal team - he is probably in the clear.
Oracle employees have absolutely no right to determine what Ellison says
Is anyone claiming otherwise? Certainly the petition doesn't.
The petition claims that Ellison's actions conflict with the Oracle code of ethics. They don't say that the CoE governs, or should govern, Ellison's actions here; they say his actions "[do] not affirm" the principles of the CoE. The implication (the warrant, in Toulmin's terminology) is that Ellison, as chair and CTO of Oracle, should conduct his public personal business in agreement with his company's CoE, as a sign of good faith.
There's also an explicit claim that Ellison's position damages Oracle by opposing social goods which Oracle has publicly (through the CoE) claimed are important to the firm.
It's really not a difficult argument to understand, and I am tempted to regard the misinterpretations of it by some commentators as willful.
The way it works in the US is that your freedom of speech is multiplied up by the number of millions of dollars you are willing to spend on airing your laudable or obnoxious ideas. As I understand it that has been confirmed by the Supreme Court: spending millions to support a particular politician is part of your freedom of speech. If you don't have millions to spend on TV ads, you remain fully entitled to announce in your local bar that you hate Donald. Good luck with that.
It's "you hate THE Donald.". The Great Orange Twat has always been called that in his 'home' town of NYC (who don't want him back), so please continue to use this grammatically correct identification.
This public service message brought to you by Cheetos. Because we really don't want him either, but since he looks like us we've been stuck with him.
I saw a headline for a news story the other day "What it's like when your parents come out as LBGTQ" and I thought WTF? How many parents did this guy have to get the full set? Or were one or more of his parents multiple options within LGBTQ? Lazy journos perpetuate these sorts of errors then they become normalised,
You forgot the "+" that has to be tagged on.
Soon the acronym will be so long it may as just have a "-" to say who isn't in the club
Before the flames, I don't give a flying fuck about someone's gender / sexuality.
Actually, can we add FF to it?
> Is this Oracle sponsoring this event or Larry personally?
It appears that it is indeed Larry's personal shindig, at his own Rancho Mirage (no idea where that is). So, Oracle employees have no say whatsoever in this.
Ethics, shmetics. Corporate Code Of Ethics? Seriously?
[ Cue in Silicon Valley: Tethics. ]
Just like everyone else, Larry has the right to political freedom of speech. As disturbing as that may be.
Disclaimer: I am not endorsing Larry Ellison's political views. Quite far from it.
> No one is saying Larry doesn't have freedom of speech.
Yes, they are saying exactly that when they are waving some Oracle Code Of Ethics document and using it to tell Larry he can't campaign or fundraise for Trump, because that's against company values.
That is an attempt at restricting speech. It's the functional equivalent of saying I disagree with your political views, therefore you can't voice them.
Clearly these employees need retraining, because - as well as losing the distinction between professional and private lives - they seem to be unfamiliar with Oracle's code of ethics.
It lists "core values", and they don't include either "diversity" or "inclusiveness". The word "diversity" appears only in the context of non-discrimination in employment, and even then it's not at the level of a "core value". "Inclusiveness" doesn't appear at all.
I was amazed by the ethics training I had to do annually when I worked there. There was a lot of emphasis on telling people not to do things that almost nobody I've met would have considered reasonable in the first place. It did make me wonder what kind of people they recruited, but then I realized it was probably all about salespeople
This is Larry's personal pleasure, though the US Supreme Court did make a landmark decision a few years ago that effectively took the lid of donations to political campaigns. Meaning that the US political system is essentially a plutocracy and most US citizens seem happy with this. Lots of individuals, companies and lobbying organisations now regularly give to all (both) parties to make sure they get the legislation they wanted. Silicon Valley types are now for giving to the Democrats but you didn't see many of them complaining about Trump's cuts in corporation tax…
Meaning that the US political system is essentially a plutocracy and most US citizens seem happy with this
Downvoted because of the "most US citizens seem happy with this" assertion, which is complete and utter bullshit. Most 1-percenters are happy with this, most proto-fascists are happy with this, most MAGATs are happy with this (so long as Cheetolini continues to suck money from the aforementioned two groups), but most US citizens most certainly aren't.
what right do Oracle employees have telling him what to do on his day off?
The same rights every US citizen has: freedom of speech and of the press. They can tell anyone pretty much anything.
They have no right to compel him, but then they're not trying to. Read the petition if you can't grasp this concept. It's not hard.
"Larry is the company. Whatever he does, the company's image is involved. So they care."
Most employment contracts will probably something about "bringing the company into disrepute" which can, in the right circumstances, can affect what you can do in your private or public life, eg if you are well known as an employee of a company, or wearing a company uniform, logo or ID while doing thing. Not that affects the people on the top floor of course.
You have it in reverse for USA. Only the people on the top floor will have contracts, which spell out every term of employment, separation etc. It binds both ways.
The minions don't have contracts, and can resign or be terminated without notice. That's what 'at will' means.
In UK, full time employees expect a contract by right, and if a company doesn't issue it then the terms are normally the best an employee can wish for under challenge.
Most employment contracts will probably something about "bringing the company into disrepute"IANAL, however I would be stunned if that would apply to personal political support. You really think someone could be fired depending on the political party or person they have declared support for (as long as not done disruptively at work nor on work time nor using work resources, e.g. work provided discussion boards).
I mean, if that was the case, if the media was conducting a post-poll interview and asking people who walk past "who did you support" and you answered, you could be fired.
I don't think Donald Trump is that bad.
He wouldn't be if his gutless party stood up to him instead of lying on the floor kissing his feet.
And I can understand the likes of larry and thesouthern rednecks voting for him.... but the christian right?
Relax, it's just a label.
Whilst there are christians who are on the right of politics, the group that self-identifies as "the christian right" is not christian in the eyes of pretty much every other adherent of that faith. It is more like the "German Democratic Republic" or the "Chinese Communist Party".
"We are disappointed that Oracle Founder and CTO Larry Ellison’s support of Donald Trump does not affirm Oracle’s core values of diversity, inclusiveness, and ethical business conduct," the petition says. "As Oracle employees, we must hold our leaders accountable for upholding their ethical responsibilities."
1) Holding leaders accountable isn't the same as telling them what to do in their spare time
2) Diversity doesn't mean "only voting for this candidate is okay"
3) Trump's gross, but that doesn't invalidate the above
Last time he pretended to be the self-funded billionaire candidate. Himself+family have made enough money in the last four years that he can actually be a self-funded billionaire candidate this time.
Wall repairs may be expensive but Larry isn't Mexican so why is he paying?
And in all those cases the "conduct code" is more of a guide for how not to conduct your company.
No great lover of American politics, but would there have been a similar outcry if Ellison had organised a fund-raiser for Sanders?
would there have been a similar outcry if Ellison had organised a fund-raiser for Sanders?
Why does it matter?
Some Oracle employees are exercising their freedoms of speech and of the press. Perhaps they would in some hypothetical other universe; perhaps they wouldn't.
Trump is very entertaining to watch. And the Democrats are so deranged and crazy that the show is just hilarious. George Carlin was right. If you are born into this world you get a free ticket to a freak show. If you are born in US you get the front row seat. I think 4 more years of Trump would be awesome.
"of an education, a job, a house, a family!
It has been an amazing time for all Americans..."
Citation needed. There are certainly a lot of Americans who *don't* think it has been an "amazing time", so you have some work to do in justifying your claim. (Or is it that people aren't real Americans if they disagree with you?)
In 4 years, the US will be pulling ahead of China on environment pollution output.
The UN and NATO will no longer be. If enemies of your country invade and overthrow your government, I'm pretty sure Trump will sit on his fat ass...
...unless it involves Saudi Arabia or Russia.
"In 4 years, the US will be pulling ahead of China on environment pollution output."
No they won't. The US is reducing it's carbon footprint faster than any other nation on earth.
"If enemies of your country invade and overthrow your government, I'm pretty sure Trump will sit on his fat ass..."
And? Why is it Americas problem if other countries invade each other?
re: "And? Why is it Americas problem if other countries invade each other?"
Because they just won't be able to stop themselves interfering and no doubt sending many of their young men to an early grave".
But hey, as long as it's not one of your young men, it's not a problem. Right?
Don't worry they all answer to our Chinese Communist Overloads. Like all the other corporate clones, Larry just do their bidding and trying to convince Trump will let up on his tariffs. The Chinese control all sides. Business is bought out by Chinese bribes and the culture mouths a bunch of slogans that undermine the culture. Our universities are heavily influenced by Chinese Communist sympathizers pushing their cultural revolution ideals (since they learn how effective it was at destroying their own civilization). Funny, how I don't see Chinese industry asking for open markets or their population demanding for open borders.
McCarthy had nothing to do with HUAC
Unsurprising, he died 12 years before it was setup.
He did,however, preside over the same "reds under the bed" type of scare in the 40's and 50's, and it was his efforts which led to HUAC being created, and the whole ethos being called "McCarthyism".
Consider the fact that we're talking about Oracle here, the company that has been known for time immortal to be a company so vile, so amoral and greed-driven that in comparison Microsoft and IBM at their worst appeared like choir boys. Of course dear ol' Larry would want to smooch up to his ol' boy Trump, because everything Trump does aligns perfectly fine with all that Oracle stands for: unbridled greed, tax cuts for the rich, and as few protections and rights for employees as possible.
I wish these folk luck in their effort to change Larry's mind, but... they work at Oracle, I'm sorry to say.
If they had ethics they would never have created that dog shit taco application Peoplesoft, jack of all trades but master of none and pigeon holed into many a company adding absolutely zero value but maximum pain. I ask is it a HR application or an accounting package? I don't even think it knows itself.
I'll see myself out thanks.
1) Oracle is not a democracy. You get told what to do in exchange for money. Don't like it? Leave.
2) Like him or not (I do not) Ellison runs the company the way he wants as he's the CTO, chairman and owns $60 BILLION worth of Oracle stock.
3) Corporations are not charities, they exist to make money. If Trump in office is a win for Oracle then Oracle will provides funds to aid Trumps re-election.
"You need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' -- lawnmower doesn't give a shit about you, lawnmower can't hate you. Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmower. Don't fall into that trap about Oracle" - Bryan Cantrill
Now the Scrotus is hanging on the republican side, and republicans running scared of their Dictator-In-Chief, this seem like the most logical thing Larry could do.
Let's see if this is to followed up by some of the turmeric man's tweets. After all, Larry is a great American and not nasty at all unlike Google who are run by some foreign sounding/looking guy... I mean, is he even legally in the USA ?
The fact that a private citizen has the means and motivation to support their choice of political candidate is not a conflict of the ethical or moral policies of a business that they may be associated. And the employees, I'm sure, are welcome to secure alternative employment, at their earliest opportunity. Most successful corporations, aside from recommendations from a board for direction, are not generally democracies...
An awful lot of posters seem to be under the misapprehension that Larry 'owns' Oracle. Oracle is a corporation and owned by its shareholders. Larry is Executive Chairman and CTO, so he is, in a real sense an employee of the corporation, and presumably therefore should abide by the corporations code of ethics. He owns a big tranche of shares, but institutions hold more.
So, Trumps a big asshole, and I don't think anyone should be fundraising for him.
The recent (few years ago) situation with Chic-Fil-A, people argued against boycotting them for some political activities of their owners; but, in that case, the owners were direct owners, they were essentially commingling company funds to fund their political activities.
In this case, Ellison is using his own money and his own property. The employees have a right to be unhappy about it, I don't think anyone should be raising money for Trump. But I also think he's entirely within his right to do so, and it's none of the company's business to tell him how to conduct himself when he's out of the office.