Google also recently terminated the maintainer of the republicans@google list.
No politics talk at work seems to be the rational and only solution here.
Our elders really knew how to do some things right.
Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
81–90 of 165 posts
Re: Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
#82She walked out for good. Gotta admire her integrity! Also this from her post just hits the nail on the head: > [Google leadership] are talking to everyone who thought my story sounded familiar, anyone who’s been Through It in some form: pushed out or punished for speaking up, gaslit, discriminated against, isolated, harassed. People are telling each other their stories. Refusing to acknowledge our humanity and engage…
I forwarded this story to my HR department with the suggestion that we find a way to expedite our company's transition away from GSuite. I've been using GSuite (and Gmail) since they launched, so when even a long-term user thinks Google isn't worth it anymore--to the point of actively evangelizing against the use of Google services--Google's got serious issues. If they can't resolve this soon, they'll be the new IBM.…
I don't know what is more hilarious: the fact that you would pass judgement on a ~$1TN company based on the experience of a disgruntled employee [1], or that HR makes technical decisions in your company.
[1] mind you, I feel Claire is honest in upholding her views and doesn't have an agenda.
Re: Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eventually if they tarnish their image sufficiently the good workers will move on. However we here and elsewhere on discussion sites vastly over estimate how unhappy workers are at a particular job. Just because we would not want to work there or heard anecdotally on an issue does not mean the company is doing things incorrectly. A company this large is bound to have employee conflicts all over the place and it is up…
I think one of the problems is that they're still seen as having a "good" work environment compared to Amazon (which has a reputation for being hard on its employees) and Facebook (which these days is seen as having an ethical "cloud" over it). Whether or not these reputations are deserved is irrelevant, it seems like Google will have to do a lot of damage to its reputation before labor market forces push back. More…
> every fresh batch of graduates who come into the workforce are equally terrible at advocating for themselves
cough the problem is further up the pipeline cough.
Re: Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
#84It's unfortunate.. I'm pretty sure this story is getting buried. It's insane GOOG would do these things, include threats of demotion. Who gets demoted these days anyways?
Unfortunately it is t that insane. This happens every day, every hour, and every minute in corporations around this country. For profit is t for people full stop. The bottom of the barrel is always feasible.
Re: Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's designed to provide employees an incentive to go above and beyond in their particular area of employment by providing future financial incentives, without having a say in the overall direction of the company. Or put another way, it's a possible bonus if you and others like you do well.
That intention is still a perversion of the actual intention of stocks and the stocks market, though. If you wanted to tie bonuses to share price, you can just do that instead of issuing these fake stocks. Plenty of people get paid with bonuses tied to share price or EPS.
It's a tax thing. It's apparently cheaper to give someone $100k of stock versus $100k of cash.
Re: Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sundar Pichai is an employee and board member. He's not a "regular" employee, but I don't think a regular employee gets enough perspective to make effective decisions across the company. They would have to take their board position more seriously than their full time job, which would make them not a regular employee anymore.
I am not sure what you did there, an Ouroboros argument about a continual and inseparable membrane between the owners and the workers? Is it _really_ not possible to have employee representation? I find that hard to believe.
I think the claimed conflict is fundamental, not coincidental. When people talk about employee board representation, the central example of the representative they're talking about is someone paid to be involved in day-to-day, on-the-ground operations. Someone on the board of a large company would be worse than useless without dedicating a decent amount of time with understanding the complexities of the company's operation, which means they won't have time to be spending on the factory floor (or whatever) like a regular Joe.
This isn't insurmountable, as none of these constraints are inherent to the concept of employee representation. But it does require some more detail, or you end up with a decidedly non-central case like the one described elsethread, where Sundar Pichai counts as employee representation.
Re: Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure some companies can benefit from employee representation on the board, but I don't think Google is one of them. Google is possibly the cushiest company to work for in the entire world. I and I imagine most shareholders would rather Google spend more money on self-driving cars than solving every little grievance employees have.
> Google is possibly the cushiest company to work for in the entire world It has an enduring reputation for having been cushy in the past - and it might still feel cushy if you happen to mesh well with the prevailing company culture. But many people don't see it that way, apparently - to the point where they feel that their work itself is being impacted. And the way the whole Rubin story has been handled is also indi…
>And the way the whole Rubin story has been handled is also indicative of very real problems, to be sure.
Maybe Google has gotten worse, but the way the employees reacted to this "scandal" leads me to believe that they're acting entitled. Rubin was accused of harassment and asked to leave. That's all that should matter from an employee's perspective. The $90 million payout was a hedge to ensure that Rubin doesn't sue Google and cause negative publicity. It's not coming out of the employee's paycheck, so it's none of their business.
Re: Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think one of the problems is that they're still seen as having a "good" work environment compared to Amazon (which has a reputation for being hard on its employees) and Facebook (which these days is seen as having an ethical "cloud" over it). Whether or not these reputations are deserved is irrelevant, it seems like Google will have to do a lot of damage to its reputation before labor market forces push back. More…
> every fresh batch of graduates who come into the workforce are equally terrible at advocating for themselves cough the problem is further up the pipeline cough .
The way you've phrased it, it sounds like you think what you're saying is obvious, but it's not obvious to me. What are you saying?
Re: Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
#89These companies are so huge and such an integral part of society that they need to be made more accountable to the public, and forcing them to be more accountable to their workers is part of that. I think the recent proposal to require employee representation on the board of directors of $1B+ companies is a good start.
Public accountability is a slippery slope. How do you accomplish that? Legislation? New legislation pitched as a solution to a problem tends to be a rat's nest of rules that no one understands, that doesn't often have the intended impact, that can have unintended consequences, and, after some public shaming of the offender, lets them conduct business as usual.
Not sure employee representation on the board is a solution to anything. Not that I think it's necessarily a bad thing either. It's just that if you're looking to that as a solution to the problem of big companies that are too big I think you will be disappointed. Employees on the board can be as corrupt and unaccountable as anyone else.
The solution to Google is to stop using their products. Stop using Android, stop using search, stop using Chrome, ditch as much of the ecosystem as possible. It makes a difference even if you can't get away from them completely and it starts with the individual.
There are too many people bitching about Google and still using their products. Hit them where it hurts because it's the only way they will learn. Before Google was evil Microsoft was evil. Antitrust largely failed against them. It took the early adopters being completely fed up with them and using other products to make a difference. Microsoft missed out on mobile, nearly missed out on cloud, ceded a massive chunk of the server market to Linux, saw a resurgence of Mac on the desktop, had their own failures in the OS market and were basically washed up before they finally decided to do something different. Frankly, they are doing a pretty darn good job lately. They are making good products and embracing interoperability.
I think Microsoft is a better company today than they would have been had the antitrust case been more "successful". We put up with their crap for as long as we did only because there weren't very good alternatives for much of that time. Ironically, the rise of Google helped break the stranglehold. Google doesn't have the same invincibility that Microsoft did. There are alternatives for every product they have. If we want them to change then it's time to start using these alternatives.
Re: Google Walkout Organizer Claire Stapleton Resigns
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
google is actually a 3-class stock: class B has 10 votes and is not available publicly (owned by larry, sergey, eric), class A has one vote and trades as GOOGL, class C is nonvoting and trades as GOOG. Employees only get grants of GOOG and thus have no votes
Oh wow. TIL! I (and the rest of HN, and even S&P[1]) was screaming bloody murder about Snapchat IPOing and only releasing non-voting shares. I didn't know Google worked the same way! [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14904946
I thought for Snap, any investor can only buy non-voting share? For Google, you (or I during the open window) can buy GOOGL and have voting share?
Disc: Googler.