“well, we have a lot of employees, and in the limit it seems pretty likely that at least one of them will make a wildly incorrect judgment call about a model that everyone else at the company thinks is safe”.
This risk is real but we should balance it against the benefits (reducing the risk that the company does something risky despite at least one employee (and possibly several) having concerns about it.) That latter risk is extremely high IMO and it is imperative to reduce it.
In other contexts, it seems it’s quite common for a disgruntled employee to go to a journalist and blow up a minor problem. Why can’t this similarly be abused if the bar isn’t high?
This risk is real but we should balance it against the benefits (reducing the risk that the company does something risky despite at least one employee (and possibly several) having concerns about it.) That latter risk is extremely high IMO and it is imperative to reduce it.
In other contexts, it seems it’s quite common for a disgruntled employee to go to a journalist and blow up a minor problem. Why can’t this similarly be abused if the bar isn’t high?
I said the risk was real. I then said that if we don’t do this, we run a much bigger and more serious risk.
Because the bill only prevents employers from forbidding employees from reporting those issues to the AG or Labor Commissioner?