"While workers who want to stay at home forever have been especially vocal about their demands, a silent majority of Americans do want to get back to the office, at least for a few days a week..." reports the New York Times. The article, shared by long-time Slashdot reader gollum123, cites the opinions of workers in a variety of industries. In a national survey of more than 950 workers, conducted in mid-August by Morning Consult on behalf of The New York Times, 31 percent said they would prefer to work from home full time. By comparison, 45 percent said they wanted to be in a workplace or an office full time. The remaining 24 percent said they wanted to split time between work and home... The data intelligence company's findings echoed recent internal surveys by employers like Google and Twitter, as well as outside surveys by firms like Eden Workplace. Among those craving the routines of office life and cubicle chatter: social butterflies, managers, new hires eager to meet colleagues, and people with noisy or crowded homes...

Certainly, some people have thrived in their new remote work lives. They saved time and money, and sometimes increased productivity. The degree to which employees have embraced permanent remote or hybrid work models has been "stunning" to company executives, said Tsedal Neeley, a Harvard Business School professor who has studied remote work for decades. But for others, Professor Neeley said, it has removed needed barriers between work and home life, increased a sense of isolation and led to burnout. "Some people just dislike the screen — their physicality and their proximity to others is a big part of what work looks like," she said.
In the Times' article, here's how one 23-year-old recent college graduate starting at Google described their own dilemma.

"If we don't get a really solid foundation at this company in our first six months, our first year, what foot does that leave us on for the rest of our time at the company?"

An anonymous reader shares a report: When Microsoft updated its Teams communication app with a more sophisticated way to give PowerPoint presentations in January, the company published a 500-word blog post on the feature. People could read the blog post and try to figure out how to use it, or they could consult YouTube. On the video service owned by arch-rival Google, a former Microsoft employee named Kevin Stratvert published a video on Presenter Mode to his more than 800,000 subscribers, garnering more than 180,000 views and hundreds of comments. Microsoft itself had not published a video on the topic. "I've built a Microsoft audience," Stratvert said in an interview with CNBC. "Microsoft content drives a lot more viewership than non-Microsoft content. I've done Gmail and a few others, but they haven't done quite as well."

[...] Historically, developing and maintaining products has been the core of Microsoft. Today nearly 50% of employees work in engineering. Marketing is a considerably smaller part of the business, and employees work on ads, materials for Microsoft's website, events and other methods of promotion. In the past few years, a group inside Microsoft began focusing more on YouTube. "On YouTube specifically, we're starting to explore the concept of what it looks like to do something native to YouTube," Sonia Atchison, a market research lead who worked on the Microsoft Creators Program, said on a podcast last year. People often turn to YouTube when they want to get a better understanding of Microsoft software, and while Microsoft has plenty of its own videos available on YouTube, they don't always come up at the top of the site's search results, Atchison said. Videos from outsiders can receive higher rankings. Sometimes a video from a Microsoft employee might be there. The company does have employees with large audiences, including Mike Tholfsen, a 26-year company veteran whose videos show how teachers and students can use Teams and other applications.

Back in January, researchers warned that the iPhone 12 lineup and MagSafe accessories could potentially deactivate implanted medical devices. Now, the American Heart Association has released a study that corroborates these findings on a larger scale, noting that several devices from three major companies were "found to have magnetic susceptibility." Gizmodo reports: The initial study published in HeartRhythm was done on a single patient with a Medtronic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). It was an important finding in terms of awareness, but raised questions as to whether this would impact ICDs from all device makers if the iPhone 12 lineup posed a greater risk than other magnetized devices, and what the impact on pacemakers might be. The AHA's study offers a few preliminary insights into what those answers might be. In the study, researchers observed the impact of an iPhone 12 Pro Max on both ICDs and pacemakers from multiple device makers, as well as conducted both in vivo and ex vivo tests. In vivo refers to tests done on actual patients with an implanted medical device, while the ex vivo tests were done on 11 unboxed devices. The devices tested came from Medtronic, Abbot, and Boston Scientific. (You can see exactly which ICDs and pacemakers were tested in the study itself.)

In 100% of the three in vivo tests, the iPhone 12 Pro Max triggered the devices' magnet reversion mode. That said, the Boston Scientific pacemaker was found to be less susceptible as it only triggered a temporary response. In ex vivo testing, magnetic interference was detected in 8 out of 11 devices, or 72.7%. There are a few things to note here. How seriously a device is impacted may depend on the sensors or components used. The study notes that magnetic interference can occur when medical devices are exposed to magnetic fields as little as 10G. According to the researchers, the iPhone 12 Pro Max has a magnetic field strength of over 50G. However, the ex vivo devices tested didn't respond uniformly. Some were only temporarily disrupted, others had sustained asynchronous pacing, and three weren't impacted at all. The researchers suggest that in the case of a Boston Scientific Accolade MRI pacemaker, the device may not have been affected because it requires a magnet stronger than 70G. After the HeartRhythm study was published, Apple issued additional guidance urging consumers with implanted medical devices to keep iPhone 12 devices more than 6 inches away, or more than 12 inches if wirelessly charging. It also recommended those people consult with both their physician and device manufacturer.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: With the coronavirus pandemic receding for every vaccine that reaches an arm, the push by some employers to get people back into offices is clashing with workers who've embraced remote work as the new normal. While companies from Google to Ford and Citigroup have promised greater flexibility, many chief executives have publicly extolled the importance of being in offices. Some have lamented the perils of remote work, saying it diminishes collaboration and company culture. JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s Jamie Dimon said at a recent conference that it doesn't work "for those who want to hustle." But legions of employees aren't so sure. If anything, the past year has proved that lots of work can be done from anywhere, sans lengthy commutes on crowded trains or highways. Some people have moved. Others have lingering worries about the virus and vaccine-hesitant colleagues.

It's still early to say how the post-pandemic work environment will look. Only about 28% of U.S. office workers are back at their buildings, according to an index of 10 metro areas compiled by security company Kastle Systems. Many employers are still being lenient with policies as the virus lingers, vaccinations continue to roll out and childcare situations remain erratic. But as office returns accelerate, some employees may want different options. A May survey of 1,000 U.S. adults showed that 39% would consider quitting if their employers weren't flexible about remote work. The generational difference is clear: Among millennials and Gen Z, that figure was 49%, according to the poll by Morning Consult on behalf of Bloomberg News. The lack of commutes and cost savings are the top benefits of remote work, according to a FlexJobs survey of 2,100 people released in April. More than a third of the respondents said they save at least $5,000 per year by working remotely.

Earlier this week Greg Kroah-Hartman of the Linux kernel development team banned the University of Minnesota from contributing after researchers there submitted what he called "obviously-incorrect patches" believed to be part of a research project into whether buggy code would be accepted.

Today the professor in charge of that project, as well as two of its researchers, sent an email to the Linux kernel mailing list saying they "sincerely apologize for any harm our research group did to the Linux kernel community." Our goal was to identify issues with the patching process and ways to address them, and we are very sorry that the method used in the "hypocrite commits" paper was inappropriate. As many observers have pointed out to us, we made a mistake by not finding a way to consult with the community and obtain permission before running this study; we did that because we knew we could not ask the maintainers of Linux for permission, or they would be on the lookout for the hypocrite patches. While our goal was to improve the security of Linux, we now understand that it was hurtful to the community to make it a subject of our research, and to waste its effort reviewing these patches without its knowledge or permission.

We just want you to know that we would never intentionally hurt the Linux kernel community and never introduce security vulnerabilities. Our work was conducted with the best of intentions and is all about finding and fixing security vulnerabilities... We are a research group whose members devote their careers to improving the Linux kernel. We have been working on finding and patching vulnerabilities in Linux for the past five years...

This current incident has caused a great deal of anger in the Linux community toward us, the research group, and the University of Minnesota. We apologize unconditionally for what we now recognize was a breach of the shared trust in the open source community and seek forgiveness for our missteps. We seek to rebuild the relationship with the Linux Foundation and the Linux community from a place of humility to create a foundation from which, we hope, we can once again contribute to our shared goal of improving the quality and security of Linux software... We are committed to following best practices for collaborative research by consulting with community leaders and members about the nature of our research projects, and ensuring that our work meets not only the requirements of the Institutional Review Board but also the expectations that the community has articulated to us in the wake of this incident.

While this issue has been painful for us as well, and we are genuinely sorry for the extra work that the Linux kernel community has undertaken, we have learned some important lessons about research with the open source community from this incident. We can and will do better, and we believe we have much to contribute in the future, and will work hard to regain your trust.
Their email also says their work did not introduce vulnerabilities into the Linux code. ("The three incorrect patches were discussed and stopped during exchanges in a Linux message board, and never committed to the code.")

And the email also clarifies that their research was only done in August of 2020, and "All the other 190 patches being reverted and re-evaluated were submitted as part of other projects and as a service to the community; they are not related to the 'hypocrite commits' paper. These 190 patches were in response to real bugs in the code and all correct — as far as we can discern — when we submitted them... Our recent patches in April 2021 are not part of the 'hypocrite commits' paper either."

UPDATE (4/25): Late Saturday night the kernel team's Greg Kroah-Hartman rejected the apology, writing that "the Linux Foundation and the Linux Foundation's Technical Advisory Board submitted a letter on Friday to your University outlining the specific actions which need to happen in order for your group, and your University, to be able to work to regain the trust of the Linux kernel community.

"Until those actions are taken, we do not have anything further to discuss about this issue."

The Trades Union Congress (TUC) is calling for new legal protections for workers, warning that they could soon be "hired and fired by algorithm." "Among the changes it is calling for is a legal right to have any 'high-risk' decision reviewed by a human," reports the BBC. From the report: TUC general secretary Frances O'Grady said the use of AI at work stood at "a fork in the road." "AI at work could be used to improve productivity and working lives. But it is already being used to make life-changing decisions about people at work -- like who gets hired and fired. "Without fair rules, the use of AI at work could lead to widespread discrimination and unfair treatment -- especially for those in insecure work and the gig economy," she warned.

The union body is calling for:
- An obligation on employers to consult unions on the use of "high risk" or "intrusive" AI at work
- The legal right to have a human review decisions
- A legal right to "switch off" from work and not be expected to answer calls or emails
- Changes to UK law to protect against discrimination by algorithm

The more educated people are, the more likely they are to believe claims made by QAnon, according to a tracking poll by polling firm Morning Consult. From Politico: Twenty-seven percent of people with a postgraduate degree responded that QAnon claims are either very accurate or somewhat accurate. That compared to 20% of those with a bachelor's degree and 14% of those with less than a college degree. The numbers were similar in Morning Consult's October poll.
But a new survey from the same pollsters also shows fewer Americans believing in QAnon's conspiracy theories. Newsweek writes: While eight percent of Americans still believe the radical conspiracy theory is "very accurate" and a further 10 percent consider its claims "somewhat accurate," this 18 percent figure is a six-point drop from a similar poll in October... Trust in the widely debunked conspiracy listed as a domestic terrorist threat by the FBI is also dropping among Republicans. According to the survey, 24 percent of GOP voters who have heard of QAnon say its claims are at least somewhat accurate — a 14-point drop from October...
And 51% of the adults surveyed also believe social media's spread of conspiracy theories is a "major problem."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Frontier Communications has agreed to expand its fiber-to-the-premises network and improve its poor service quality as part of a bankruptcy settlement in California. Frontier committed to deploy fiber to 350,000 homes and businesses within six years on a schedule that would require the first 100,000 by the end of 2022, 250,000 by the end of 2024, and the full 350,000 by year-end 2026. The settlement, filed in late December, is pending approval by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Frontier agreed to the terms with the Communications Workers of America (CWA), a union that represents Frontier employees; The Utility Reform Network (TURN), a consumer-advocacy group; and Cal Advocates, the public advocate office at CPUC.

To ensure that Frontier doesn't build only in wealthy areas, the 350,000-location deployment must include 150,000 customer locations where Frontier estimates it would receive less than a 20 percent "internal rate of return." For those 150,000 locations, Frontier will have to consult with the CWA, TURN, Cal Advocates, and tribal government leaders "to discuss the potential areas for deployment, including tribal lands and tribal communities," the settlement said. "As part of the proposed settlement, Frontier will be required to spend at least $1.75 billion over the next four years on service quality and network enhancement projects, as well as provide a detailed plan with input from CWA, TURN and Cal Advocates that identifies needs like plant repair, maintenance, hiring, and how Frontier intends to address them," the CWA said in a press release last week. The union said it also "secured a commitment from Frontier to maintain its total employee technician staffing in California over the next three years, and to maintain ten call center locations across the state."

Another settlement clause requires Frontier to spend $11.6 million over four years to deploy 25Mbps download speeds at 4,000 additional locations on tribal lands. The required upload speeds for this buildout are only 2Mbps, so it likely wouldn't involve fiber-to-the-home. But tribal areas should get some fiber as part of Frontier's requirement to deploy at 150,000 low "rate of return" areas. Frontier agreed to temporary price controls, as it "will not increase residential rates for copper-based standalone voice services, fiber-based standalone basic voice service, copper-based broadband services, and copper-based voice/broadband bundles through December 31, 2021," the settlement said. Frontier will also have to "provide a host of detailed, recurring reports" on network spending, service quality, and broadband commitments to help advocacy groups and the state monitor the company's compliance.

Alphabet's Google this year moved to tighten control over its scientists' papers by launching a "sensitive topics" review, and in at least three cases requested authors refrain from casting its technology in a negative light, Reuters reported Wednesday, citing internal communications and interviews with researchers involved in the work. From a report: Google's new review procedure asks that researchers consult with legal, policy and public relations teams before pursuing topics such as face and sentiment analysis and categorizations of race, gender or political affiliation, according to internal webpages explaining the policy. "Advances in technology and the growing complexity of our external environment are increasingly leading to situations where seemingly inoffensive projects raise ethical, reputational, regulatory or legal issues," one of the pages for research staff stated. Reuters could not determine the date of the post, though three current employees said the policy began in June. The "sensitive topics" process adds a round of scrutiny to Google's standard review of papers for pitfalls such as disclosing of trade secrets, eight current and former employees said. For some projects, Google officials have intervened in later stages. A senior Google manager reviewing a study on content recommendation technology shortly before publication this summer told authors to "take great care to strike a positive tone," according to internal correspondence read to Reuters.

The UK is moving ahead with a plan to regulate big tech, responding to competition concerns over a 'winner takes all' dynamic in digital markets. From a report: It will set up a new Digital Market Unit (DMU) to oversee a "pro-competition" regime for Internet platforms -- including those funded by online advertising, such as Facebook and Google -- the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) announced today. It's moving at a clip -- with the new Unit slated to begin work in April. Although the necessary law to empower the new regulator to make interventions will take longer. The government said it will consult on the Unit's form and function in early 2021 -- and legislate "as soon as parliamentary time allows." A core part of the plan is a new statutory Code of Conduct aimed at giving platform users more choice and third party businesses more power over the intermediaries that host and monetize them. The government suggests the code could require tech giants to allow users to opt out of behavioral advertising entirely -- something Facebook's platform, for example, does not currently allow. It also wants the code to support the sustainability of the news industry by "rebalancing" the relationship between publishers and platform giants, as it puts it.

As part of efforts to stop the spread of false information about the coronavirus pandemic, Wikipedia and the World Health Organization announced a collaboration on Thursday: The health agency will grant the online encyclopedia free use of its published information, graphics and videos. The collaboration is the first between Wikipedia and a health agency. From a report: "We all consult just a few apps in our daily life, and this puts W.H.O. content right there in your language, in your town, in a way that relates to your geography," said Andrew Pattison, a digital content manager for the health agency who helped negotiate the contract. "Getting good content out quickly disarms the misinformation." Since its start in 2001, Wikipedia has become one of the world's 10 most consulted sites; it is frequently viewed for health information. The agreement puts much of the W.H.O.'s material into the Wikimedia "commons," meaning it can be reproduced or retranslated anywhere, without the need to seek permission -- as long as the material is identified as coming from the W.H.O. and a link to the original is included.

"Equitable access to trusted health information is critical to keeping people safe and informed," said Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the W.H.O.'s director general. His agency translates its work into six official languages, which do not include, for example, Hindi, Bengali, German or Portuguese, so billions of people cannot read its documents in their native or even second language. Wikipedia articles, by contrast, are translated into about 175 languages. The first W.H.O. items used under the agreement are its "Mythbusters" infographics, which debunk more than two dozen false notions about Covid-19. Future additions could include, for example, treatment guidelines for doctors, said Ryan Merkley, chief of staff at the Wikimedia Foundation, which produces Wikipedia. If the arrangement works out, it could be extended to counter misinformation regarding AIDS, Ebola, influenza, polio and dozens of other diseases, Mr. Merkley said, "But this was something that just had to happen now." Eventually, live links will be established that would, for example, update global case and death numbers on Wikipedia as soon as the W.H.O. posts them, Mr. Pattison said.

According to a report from Wisconsin's Division of Executive Budget and Finance, Foxconn has not built the enormous Gen 10.5 LCD factory in Wisconsin that it specified in its contract with the state. "It also says that the building the company claims is a smaller Gen 6 LCD factory shows no signs of manufacturing LCDs in the foreseeable future and 'may be better suited for demonstration purposes,'" reports The Verge. From the report: The report notes that Foxconn received a permit to use its so-called "Fab" for storage, which The Verge first reported this week. Furthermore, according to an industry expert consulted by the state, Foxconn has not ordered the equipment that would be needed to make LCDs. If the building were to be used as an LCD manufacturing facility, the expert notes it would be the smallest Gen 6 in the world and "would appear to be more of a showcase than a business viable for the long term." If any LCD-related manufacturing were to take place in the building, the analysis says, it would likely only be the final assembly of components produced elsewhere and imported to Wisconsin. Such a project would have a vastly smaller impact on local supply chains and employ nowhere near the 13,000 workers anticipated in Foxconn's contract with the state.

Wisconsin Secretary of the Department of Administration Joel Brennan said in an interview with The Verge today that "clearly the Gen 6 that's been discussed and built in Mount Pleasant is not similar to other Gen 6 fabs around the world." Brennan said the memo was an effort to consult industry experts to better understand the scope of Foxconn's current project and its potential impact on the state. "There was justified criticism of the [former Governor Scott] Walker administration for entering into this contract, and not really getting any outside experts for an industry that was new to Wisconsin," Brennan said. "This is about making sure that we can use the best expertise that we have inside and outside state government so that we can make the best decisions possible." The report provides the fullest articulation of the state's reason for rejecting Foxconn's subsidy payments so far. Last week, the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC), which oversees the deal, denied the company its first installment of the nearly $3 billion refundable tax credits because it hasn't built the "Gen 10.5 Fab" specified in its contract.

The project Foxconn has pursued instead, the new analysis says, would not have warranted the record-breaking subsidy package passed by then-Gov. Scott Walker, nor required the infrastructure state and local governments have built to support it. "Taxpayers fully performed their side of the agreement to date, while the Recipients have not," the report says. In fact, "state taxpayers have spent as much if not more than" Foxconn has on improvements to the company's supposed manufacturing campus. The Verge previously reported that state and local governments spent at least $400 million on the project, mostly on land and infrastructure the company will likely never need. Foxconn listed approximately $300 million in capital expenses at the end of 2019.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Quartz: If you look beyond the memes, cat videos, and quirky acronyms (TIL, OP, ELI5) you'll find a treasure trove of resources that will help you quickly get acquainted with the topics that have long eluded you. For me, even though I worked on Wall Street for nearly 15 years, Reddit is the first place I turn when I have a question about money. To me, here's what makes good financial advice: objectivity, accuracy, and relatability. With an alien mascot named Snoo, an impossibly sprawling site structure, and user anonymity, Reddit may seem like an unlikely place for the serious business of money. But in fact, it has each of these qualities in spades.

According to Amazon's Alexa, Reddit is the sixth most popular site in the US; the site reported 430 million active users at the end of 2019. Reddit is organized into niche communities (known as subreddits that begin with "r/") with their own guidelines, norms, and moderators covering both mainstream (r/kpop) and obscure (r/namenerds for new parents seeking inspiration) topics. Because users self-select to be active in these communities, Redditors are known to be passionate and have been described as "offbeat, quirky, and anti-establishment." All these qualities make it a great place for conversations about money. Consider the subreddit Frugal Living (r/Frugal), which shows what allows Reddit to offer better financial advice than many of those other sites: the Redditor community. Frugal Living's mission statement is to "understand the resources that we have, and [how to spend] them wisely and deliberately" and this subreddit contains actionable tips on eking out that last bit of toothpaste, warnings that Amazon Day is pure marketing, and why you shouldn't pay for scientific journals. These posts offer encouragement, collaboration, and a relatability that's hard to find in the traditional financial press, no matter your financial situation. [...] One final word of warning: no matter whether financial advice comes from the front page of the internet or the front page of the Wall Street Journal, it's incumbent upon the buyer to scrutinize the details, lead with skepticism, and, when appropriate, consult with professionals. Some of the communities that might help you get started, as mentioned in the article, include: Personal Finance, Frugal Living, Investing, Financial Independence / Retire Early, and Stocks.

Ontario's newly-designed license plates just hit a speedbump. Call it Plate-gate. From a report: A little background: The Canadian province's new design was unveiled by the provincial government -- led by center-right Ontario Premier Doug Ford -- last year. Almost immediately, people started comparing the plate design unfavorably to a box of Q-tips. The plates also had a new slogan -- "A Place to Grow" -- which drew the ire of some critics, who preferred the previous "Yours to Discover," which the plates had sported since 1982. Then there was the palette: Observers noticed that the new plates had the same blue color scheme as Ford's Progressive Conservative Party. But the real problems began once the plates went into use this month. "Has anyone else noticed that the newly designed @ONgov license plates are totally unreadable from distance at night?" tweeted videojournalist Andrew Collins on Friday. "Could be an issue for [Toronto] police forces in the future." A Twitter user who describes himself as a police sergeant in Kingston, Ont., tweeted another photo with the same complaint the next day: "Did anyone consult with police before designing and manufacturing the new Ontario licence plates? They're virtually unreadable at night."

The Metropolitan Police has announced it will use live facial recognition cameras operationally for the first time on London streets. From a report: The cameras will be in use for five to six hours at a time, with bespoke lists of suspects wanted for serious and violent crimes drawn up each time. Police say the cameras identified 70% of suspects but an independent review found much lower accuracy. Privacy campaigners said it was a "serious threat to civil liberties." Following earlier pilots in London and deployments by South Wales Police, the cameras are due to be put into action within a month. Police say they will warn local communities and consult with them in advance.

ProtonVPN open sourced its code this week, ZDNet reports: On Tuesday, the virtual private network (VPN) provider, also known for the ProtonMail secure email service, said that the code backing ProtonVPN applications on every system -- Microsoft Windows, Apple macOS, Android, and iOS -- is now publicly available for review in what Switzerland-based ProtonVPN calls "natural" progression.

"There is a lack of transparency and accountability regarding who operates VPN services, their security qualifications, and whether they fully conform to privacy laws like GDPR," the company says. "Making all of our applications open source is, therefore, a natural next step." Each application has also undergone a security audit by SEC Consult, which ProtonVPN says builds upon a previous partnership with Mozilla...

The source code for each app is now available on GitHub (Windows, macOS, Android, iOS). "As a community-supported organization, we have a responsibility to be as transparent, accountable, and accessible as possible," ProtonVPN says.

"Going open source helps us to do that and serve you better at the same time."
They're also publishing the results of an independent security audit for each app. "As former CERN scientists, publication and peer review are a core part of our ethos..." the company wrote in a blog post. They also point out that Switzerland has some of the world's strongest privacy laws -- and that ProtonVPN observes a strict no-logs policy.

But how do they feel about their competition? "Studies have found that over one-third of Android VPNs actually contain malware, many VPNs suffered from major security lapses, and many free VPN services that claimed to protect privacy are secretly selling user data to third parties."

A reader shares a report from Stuff.co.nz: Christchurch electrician Tim Fensom has been awarded $23,200 after he was fired for refusing to use a face scanning system. Fensom worked for construction company KME Services for eight months as a lead electrician during the construction of Christchurch's new hospital before he was fired on October 30, 2018, the Employment Relations Authority said in its determination. KME managing director Tim Lane replaced the company's paper-based timesheets with a biometric system that scanned workers' faces when they arrived and left the hospital construction site after two other subcontracting companies started using it. When Fensom raised concerns, he was told to use the system or receive a warning for breaching KME's health and safety policy.
[...]
Fensom was on a two week holiday while the system was being rolled out. When he returned on October 29, Fensom declined to use the face scanner, and instead signed in on a paper timesheet and carried on with his day. That day Fensom was given a formal warning letter for not following KME's health and safety policies. The next day when he refused again, Fensom was fired for serious misconduct. The ERA said KME failed to consult its employees about alternatives to paper-based timesheets before switching to the face-scanning software. KME was ordered to pay Fensom $12,000 as compensation for humiliation and injury to feelings and $11,286 in lost wages.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Another former employee has accused Google of violating federal labor law by firing her for activities related to labor organizing. In a Tuesday blog post, Kathryn Spiers says Google terminated her after she created a browser tool to notify employees of their organizing rights. Spiers says she worked on a Google security team that was focused on how Google employees used Chrome within the company. Part of her job was to "write browser notifications so that my coworkers can be automatically notified of employee guidelines and company policies while they surf the Web."

So when Google hired a consulting company known for its anti-union work, Spiers wrote a notification that would appear whenever Google employees visited the firm's website. The notification stated that "Googlers have the right to participate in protected concerted activities." That's a legal term of art for worker organizing efforts. It also included a link to the worker rights notification mandated by the NLRB settlement. Google responded swiftly and harshly, according to Spiers. She was suspended from her job pending an investigation. Spiers writes that Google officials "dragged me into three separate interrogations with very little warning each time. I was interrogated about separate other organizing activities, and asked (eight times) if I had an intention to disrupt the workplace." She says she wasn't allowed to consult with a lawyer. Two weeks later, on December 13, Spiers was fired. She was told that she had violated Google's policies but couldn't get more details about which policies she had violated. In an email shared with several media outlets, Google executive Royal Hansen said: "[Spiers] misused a security and privacy tool to create a pop-up that was neither about security nor privacy. She did that without authorization from her team or the Security and Privacy Policy Notifier team, and without a business justification. And she used an emergency rapid push to do it."

Hansen argued that the firing had nothing to do with the content of the message. "The decision would have been the same had the pop-up message been on any other subject," he argued.