Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 293 posts

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#181

Post by Frost1x »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #165
phamilton wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You ignore the non-union organizations that also protect their own. ABA, AMA, etc. control the supply of doctors/lawyers and accomplish the same end result as unions: higher wages and less competition.

Most unions and guilds do this. I don’t find it unreasonable, and would still sign on to a technology workers union, dues and all. Credentialing? I’d be okay with that, otherwise if everyone can “be an engineer” just by saying so, no one is (and credentialing would be superior to the white board gauntlet mess tech interviews currently are). Collective action is the only way to improve working conditions and dissuade…

With the current hiring process mess I'm a strong proponent of more universal credentials. I would happily pay and test through some licensing option once than invest similar time for some of the current interview processes at each company. My time is more important than playing continual ambiguious and inaccurate qualification games.

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#182

Post by cmrdporcupine »

throwaway0220 wrote: post #163
joshuamorton wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the corollary to this is that you're strongly encouraged to not access work stuff from a non Corp device. I don't think I've ever logged in to my Corp account from any non Corp device other than my phone, which uses a work profile for exactly that reason.

(Disclaimer: Googler here) +1. Google gives you a corp phone and computer (even multiple ones, if needed); why the heck you'd want to use your personal devices? Plus using a personal device is strongly discouraged. Also, all the companies I've worked before had similar clauses, and would always push iOS or Android certificates into your phone, so they can remote wipe the device when you leave company. Seems fairly st…

We are not supplied with a corp phone, they're only for people with a 'business need.' Been @ Google 7 years and never had one given to me other than holiday gift phones.

Now, some of the nooglers sitting near me seem to think they're entitled to one, so maybe the messaging has changed. but I just looked it up and the language is: "Full-time Googlers with a business need are eligible for one Google-paid mobile phone and SIM"

Many Googlers I know have Corp set up on their personal phone.

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#183

Post by int_19h »

marssaxman wrote: post #152
throwaway987988 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is real. On a throwaway for obvious reasons, but this is from an employment contract I've seen in the past: "I acknowledge that I have no reasonable expectation of privacy in any computer, technology system, email, handheld device, telephone, or documents that are used to conduct the business of the Company. As such, the Company has the right to audit and search all such items and systems, without further…

This all sounds completely normal. Do people actually imagine that the hardware they use at work is somehow theirs, and not their employer's? "Keep a hard boundary between your work and personal systems" has always been the right answer. I am surprised that this does not seem obvious to everyone.

"used to conduct the business of the company" is not the same as "employer's hardware".

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#184

Post by int_19h »

dragonwriter wrote: post #106
m0zg wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't understand. Google claims ownership even on the stuff that you do on _your own_ time, like nights and weekends, without using _any_ Google resources. Even if this stuff is in no way related to what you do at work.

> You don't understand. Yes I do. > Google claims ownership even on the stuff that you do on _your own_ time, like nights and weekend On what basis, as a salaried employee paid for work output and not time-at-a-place, are evenings and weekends described as “your own time” any more than any other time?

On the basis of the employer designating those days as non-work days?

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#185

Post by int_19h »

enraged_camel wrote: post #74
everdev wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But didn't they make this happen without a union?

Yes, but only because software engineers generally have more leverage than employees in other fields. (I meant "we" as in "our society".)

So, do software engineers need unions?

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#186

Post by SolaceQuantum »

ergothus wrote: post #45
anth_anm wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions and their actions are collective employee action, I'm not sure what you're saying won't work?

I'm not saying unions won't work...I'm saying they weren't involved in this case. This case doesn't look particularly repeatable WITHOUT unions.

From what I recall unions were involved in this case. Organizers of the mass protests explicitly cited receiving the advisement of union activists.

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#187

Post by dmitrygr »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #10

Wow, you mean collective employee action can be used to force an employer to stop exploitative behaviors? Who knew? :-) I'm really glad to hear that Google made this step, now if they would drop the overly expansive ownership claim in their employment agreement and the right to surveillance on personal property it would be a much more employee friendly place. I also hope that it gives them an edge in hiring which wou…

   > now if they would drop the overly
   > expansive ownership claim in their
   > employment agreement
California Labor Code §96(k)

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#188

Post by kevingadd »

throwaway0220 wrote: post #163
joshuamorton wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the corollary to this is that you're strongly encouraged to not access work stuff from a non Corp device. I don't think I've ever logged in to my Corp account from any non Corp device other than my phone, which uses a work profile for exactly that reason.

(Disclaimer: Googler here) +1. Google gives you a corp phone and computer (even multiple ones, if needed); why the heck you'd want to use your personal devices? Plus using a personal device is strongly discouraged. Also, all the companies I've worked before had similar clauses, and would always push iOS or Android certificates into your phone, so they can remote wipe the device when you leave company. Seems fairly st…

I never had a corp phone at Google and was never offered one. As far as I know they weren't available to me. It wasn't usually a problem but there were definitely cases where if I had a corp phone it would've made things easier - not like I was going to sync my personal phone up to corp and get it remote wiped.

They do hand out corp laptops like candy, which is great, but if you need to test software you're developing on a specific configuration, you basically have no choice but to use personal hardware. So let's say you're developing graphics code for Chrome, and there's a bug that only reproduces on a specific GPU - and you've got one at home. By doing that on your home PC have you now technically tainted it as a work machine even if you never checked out corp code onto it?

I guess alternately you just get your boss to expense a GPU and a PC and get all that set up and you can actually repro the bug like 4 weeks later once the purchases go through. Maybe corp purchasing is faster now than it used to be.

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#189

Post by enraged_camel »

int_19h wrote: post #185
enraged_camel wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but only because software engineers generally have more leverage than employees in other fields. (I meant "we" as in "our society".)

So, do software engineers need unions?

In certain sub-fields, such as game development, they would absolutely benefit from being part of a union, yes.

Re: Google Ends Forced Arbitration for Employees

#190

Post by throwaway2048 »

joshuamorton wrote: post #153
m0zg wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People seem to not quite get this, so I'll try to be as clear as I can. Google should not have the ability to claim ownership on unrelated work that does not use company time or resources unless _I_ _voluntarily_ relinquish such ownership. Google should have no business whatsoever interfering with what I do on my own personal time. Nor should I have to make anything open source. Nor should I need to ask anyone's _per…

The key point is "if you can demonstrate that your project doesn't compete with Google's business" IARC is really easy. I was approved for a couple projects, including one that absolutely could be considered to be competing with Google's business if they wanted, in like a week. You aren't actually legally required to go through IARC. The contract isn't enforcible in CA if you really don't compete, but I have prewritt…

If it's not enforceable, why is it in the contract? They obviously intend to try to enforce it in cases where they can, which makes claims about "don't worry about it, its not enforceable" even more shady.
Post reply on HN