If I understand the article correctly, Rubin was released due to credible evidence of sexual misconduct but was given $90M going out the door. How is this appropriate punishment? The "news" of the article is that this needs to change.
It wasn’t punishment. Google was paying him to sign a non-compete. It was in their corporate self-interest that if they couldn’t keep him due to a credible harassment accusation, they would pay for no one else to get him.
> Google found her claim credible, they said. The company did not fire Mr. Singhal, but accepted his resignation and negotiated an exit package that paid him millions and prevented him from working for a competitor, said the people.
Given the specific wording("found her claim credible"), it seems quite possible they did not have enough evidence to bring to court in case of a wrongful firing suit.
