> Kathryn Spiers, who worked as a security engineer, updated an internal Chrome browser extension so that each time Google employees visited the website of IRI Consultants — the Troy, Michigan, firm that Google hired this year amid a groundswell of labor activism at the company — they would see a pop-up message that read: “Googlers have the right to participate in protected concerted activities.”
So basically, the Google employee added arbitrary javascript to an internal chrome extension used by Google employees that triggered a popup when employees visited a specific website.
And Google fires her with the reasoning:
> “We dismissed an employee who abused privileged access to modify an internal security tool,” a Google spokeswoman said in a statement, adding that it was “a serious violation.”
I'm not at all opposed to Google employees organizing. But injecting javascript into an employer's internal chrome extension does seem like something that warrants some type of action by Google in response...
So basically, the Google employee added arbitrary javascript to an internal chrome extension used by Google employees that triggered a popup when employees visited a specific website.
And Google fires her with the reasoning:
> “We dismissed an employee who abused privileged access to modify an internal security tool,” a Google spokeswoman said in a statement, adding that it was “a serious violation.”
I'm not at all opposed to Google employees organizing. But injecting javascript into an employer's internal chrome extension does seem like something that warrants some type of action by Google in response...