James Damore has an above decent chance of winning his legal case against Google
WIRED&#x27;s take: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;google-manifesto-author-just-might-have-a-legal-case&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;google-manifesto-author-just-mig...</a><p>&gt; <i>The labor-relations law usually applies to union organizing, says Wagner. But over the years the act has been more broadly interpreted to protect employees who discuss their working conditions with each other. That might include Damore&#x27;s memo, Wagner says.</i><p>&gt; <i>Damore says he also plans to invoke a California law that bars employers from retaliating against workers who complain about illegal working conditions. He doesn&#x27;t have to prove that his working conditions were illegal, Wagner says. Instead, she says Damore&#x27;s lawyer might argue that his memo was protected under California law, because it related to allegedly unequal treatment of employees.</i><p>Citing a law that was put in place to protect union organizers seemed weird, but I guess it makes sense if there is precedent for interpreting it in speech not explicitly related to union organizing.<p>Arguing that Google retaliated because he made allegations about unethical&#x2F;illegal corporate behavior seems like a much stronger case, since he literally did make those claims in the memo.