i suppose that uber the solely-for-profit corporation will decide to offer grief counselling to employees - or not - based on some cold-blooded approximately rational position of corporate self-interest. it may make sense to offer grief counselling if it doesn't cost very much and may reduce risk of churn of key people in engineering.

i don't have much empathy -- if you get paid to work on self-driving cars you probably have a pretty good range of options in life to be working on many different projects with various employers. if the product you are developing accidentally kills people, and you're not okay with that, there's the option of doing something else. although maybe many other potential employers for this skill set might be developing weapons systems to actively kill people...

personally i am more concerned with how uber treats members of the general public, or disadvantaged people it has a disproportionate amount of power over (uber drivers) rather than its engineer employees.

According to http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/05/inside-uber-lawsuits-trav...

> Last summer, after a man died in a Tesla that was using the car’s Autopilot system, which allows for autonomous driving on highways, Levandowski told several Uber engineers that they were not pushing aggressively enough. “I’m pissed we didn’t have the first death,” Levandowski said, according to a person familiar with the conversation. (Levandowski denies saying this.)

If the quote is real, and this approach is widespread at Uber, grief counseling might not be necessary.

They should probably save the money for a mega settlement with the victim’s family.

Yes