[tharne]

No, but they can:

1. Close the office and allow people to work from home.

2. Alert employees who are the most likely to have been in contact with that individual, without naming the individual.

I'm pretty sure closing your office and allowing your employees to work from home when there's a pandemic falls under the category of "Don't be Evil"

[d1zzy]

> 2. Alert employees who are the most likely to have been in contact with that individual, without naming the individual.

How do we know that's not being done? The article mentions "taking all necessary measures", that can easily be interpreted as additional measures not specified in the public release.

[koheripbal]

As someone with friends in that specific Google office - I can tell you that employees have been told NOTHING.

Google didn't even send the email until AFTER business hours on Friday.

Despicable.

[d1zzy]

> As someone with friends in that specific Google office - I can tell you that employees have been told NOTHING.

I'm talking about contacting the people that may have come into contact with the sick employee not contacting the entire office. How do we know that's not being done? We don't have any details here to draw conclusions that this isn't being handled correctly. We don't know if the employee wasn't already working from home, came back from a vacation, was into office very little time or made very little contact with coworkers. You're assuming the worst, that the employee in question was mingling with everyone for days while being sick and then that the announcement going out on Friday was somehow too late (that the management was made aware of it for many days before the announcement went out).

> Google didn't even send the email until AFTER business hours on Friday.

Is that too late? How long did Google know about the sick employee as being confirmed with this virus before they decided to make a public announcement about it?