One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions • Hacker News Board

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#261

Post by lotsofpulp » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:33 PM UTC

eythian wrote: post #239

lotsofpulp wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expecting to have the same rights as if using your own devices when using someone else’s device that they are paying you to perform work on qualifies as an indignity to me. Do people in EU countries expect to use any other of their employer’s equipment for personal reasons?

Of course. It's completely normal to use company stuff for your own things, within reason. I print tickets or whatever at work, from my work laptop. Everyone does that, and no one cares so long as it's not abusive. It's a weird idea that you have to be a complete robot at work and only ever do work things.

No one cares if you print tickets at work. But the nature of communications, malware, and legal risks to an organization via computers makes it so monitoring computer activities makes sense to me.

But the official position of the company can’t be “everyone use the company’s resources as they see it for personal use”. So it’s best to just say company resources are for company. What if someone gets hurt using company machinery for personal use? In the US, that would be cause for the company’s workman’s compensation insurance premiums to increase. Why would an employer want that kind of headache?

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#262

Post by lotsofpulp » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:35 PM UTC

normalnorm wrote: post #250

lotsofpulp wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expecting to have the same rights as if using your own devices when using someone else’s device that they are paying you to perform work on qualifies as an indignity to me. Do people in EU countries expect to use any other of their employer’s equipment for personal reasons?

> Expecting to have the same rights as if using your own devices when using someone else’s device that they are paying you to perform work on qualifies as an indignity to me. Every single second that you are working, you know that your employer might be looking over your shoulder. It's like living under a microscope. For me, this is an indignity. Having to work in such circumstances would probably drive me to deep de…

US law holds the employer responsible for what happens on their computers. No one cares to if you check your email every now and then or read the news. But how can an organization protect itself from the myriad ways someone can damage the computer or others on the network without monitoring it?

In addition, everyone has a personal computer in their pocket they can use if they want privacy.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#263

Post by cptskippy » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:37 PM UTC

say_it_as_it_is wrote: post #208

What we are seeing are the consequences of "Employee Capture". Google captured the hearts and minds of its employees for workplace productivity. Its side effects are varied. The real world only sees highlights. Googled created a bubble from which its employees can socialize without ever needing to do so with the outside world. Why talk politics with the outside world? Stay with us, where it is safe, people are intell…

> Being fired from Google amounts to not just losing a job but "friends" and the only people who the company encouraged socializing with.

I've never worked for Google so I have no basis for comparison but it's very common across white collar jobs for employees social circles to very closely if not entirely overlap with work.

Unless you participated in extracurricular activities that weren't school sponsored, you probably never learned to make friends outside of school. Work, like school, is how you develop your social circle.

The growing epidemic of loneliness is probably in part due to the rise of teleworking. No longer do people grab a drink after work.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#264

Post by matwood » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:38 PM UTC

cheeze wrote: post #38

spaceribs wrote: post #7

As an engineer, I revel in avoiding these monolithic supercorps. I don't know why anyone would want to work in centralizing innovation and creativity into the hands of a few greedy people.

Money, "Impact", resources. This is a very HN comment, but I'm not sure how you can't see why someone would want to work for bigcorp...

There is a lot of money out there. And, if you don't have to live near a FAANG the money you do make can go much farther.

Does the rank and file really have much impact at one of the FAANG companies? I've talked to some ex-Google employees who left so they could have an impact somewhere.

The FAANGs do have effectively infinite resources, but compute has been for the most part democratized. Resources are very inexpensive now.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#265

Post by lovich » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:42 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #229

normalnorm wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one has a feeling of their privacy being violated, because there's no expectation of privacy when using someone else's (the company's) property. Excellent. Now you only have to remove the expectation of privacy in any situation from the social norms, and another big problem will be solved. You will be able to live under total surveillance without anyone feeling that their privacy is being violated, because there…

Expecting to have the same rights as if using your own devices when using someone else’s device that they are paying you to perform work on qualifies as an indignity to me. Do people in EU countries expect to use any other of their employer’s equipment for personal reasons?

>Expecting to have the same rights as if using your own devices when using someone else’s device that they are paying you to perform work on qualifies as an indignity to me.

Ah, but it's not someone else's device now is it? It's a corporation's device and corporation's have lobbied for laws that specifically prevent individuals for being liable for the colorations actions. If they aren't liable for the actions of said corporation, why should this be treated as two people's opposing rights of property vs privacy rather than a non human entity's property rights vs a humans privacy rights?

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#266

Post by daemin » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:48 PM UTC

manfredo wrote: post #140

defen wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google also has a clause in their employment agreement that says you agree to them putting surveillance software on your devices, company supplied and personal, as a condition of your employment. How would Google even know about your personal devices? That seems to only make sense if you intend to use your personal device for work.

It's not even an unusual condition. At Dropbox, starting some time in either 2018 or 2019 we had to install a remote administration app on our devices if we wanted to connect to corp vpn or to log into corporate google accounts. Mostly so that the device could be wiped if it was lost, IIRC.

Another reason not to have work email, chat, or any other work system on your personal phone/pc/etc.

I think it is a good incentive to disconnect from the workplace.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#267

Post by JohnBooty » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:48 PM UTC

cptskippy wrote: post #263

say_it_as_it_is wrote: post #208

What we are seeing are the consequences of "Employee Capture". Google captured the hearts and minds of its employees for workplace productivity. Its side effects are varied. The real world only sees highlights. Googled created a bubble from which its employees can socialize without ever needing to do so with the outside world. Why talk politics with the outside world? Stay with us, where it is safe, people are intell…

> Being fired from Google amounts to not just losing a job but "friends" and the only people who the company encouraged socializing with. I've never worked for Google so I have no basis for comparison but it's very common across white collar jobs for employees social circles to very closely if not entirely overlap with work. Unless you participated in extracurricular activities that weren't school sponsored, you prob…

    The growing epidemic of loneliness is probably 
    in part due to the rise of teleworking. No 
    longer do people grab a drink after work.

Well, it can go either way. Depends on your situation. For me, teleworking has been a help to my social life.

Now that I'm a teleworker, I've got about 10 extra hours of time each week that I don't have to spend commuting. So that actually has benefits for my social life, since I never really hung out with my coworkers anyway!

Of course, I'm a best-case scenario. I have a wife. I have pets. I've lived in this area my whole life and have friends here. I don't need workplace friends. If you don't have those things then you might depend on your workplace for your social connections a little bit more.

To be honest I think workplace friends can really suck anyway. I have made great friends at various jobs, but these days I sort of like to keep "work" and "friends" separate. Having workplace friends can be healthy, but depending on your workplace for friends seems extremely unhealthy. I mean, what happens when you're no longer with the company? It's like you've left a cult and now all your connections have been severed.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#268

Post by TheMightyLlama » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:51 PM UTC

manfredo wrote: post #155

rtpg wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

fighting against the creation of a union is just as a political act as trying to create one (as an example). Saying "oh we should keep the office apolitical by not having a union" is a political act. Saying "oh we shouldn't complain about the kind of customers our emplyoer has" is a political act. Acting in opposition to political acts is in itself a political act. The apolitical thing to do would be to _not interven…

Perhaps in an non-standard understanding of what is and isn't political. An apolitical office is political in the same sense that secularism is a religious stance. It's not catering to any specific religion: it is equally exclusive of all religions. Similarly, an apolitical office doesn't prevent or directly influence the political activity of workers - it just relegates that political activity to spaces outside the…

Perhaps in an non-standard understanding of what is and isn't sexual. An asexual office is sexual in the same sense that secularism is a religious stance. It's not catering to any specific religion: it is equally exclusive of all religions. Similarly, an asexual office doesn't prevent or directly influence the sexual activity of workers - it just relegates that sexual activity to spaces outside the office. > Saying "oh we should keep the office asexual by not having a relationship" is a sexual act. Saying "oh we shouldn't complain about the kind of customers our emplyoer has" is a sexual act.

That isn't keeping sex out of the workplace - it's the exact opposite. That's explicitly bringing sex into the workplace by trying to tell coworkers what preferences they should have. Curbing this behavior is exactly what keeping sex out of the workplace is about.

> Acting in opposition to sexual acts is in itself a sexual act. The asexual thing to do would be to _not intervene in others' sexual engagements_. If mgmt let its employees organize relationships with the same willingness as a movie night, then they would be acting asexually.

For the third time, Keeping sex out of the workplace does not oppose any preference. It's about making clear that the office is not a space for sexual activity. Yes, the asexual thing is to not intervene in others' sexual relationships.

The reality is, bringing sex into the workplace is a very significant intervention in people's sexual lives. In the sexually active offices I've worked in, plenty of employees feigned support for things they didn't support because they felt it was expected of them. Co workers whose preferences were part of the company majority dominated the conversation, because co-workers with minority preferences didn't want to risk repercussions for voicing unpopular preferences.

So if you want a company that does not intervene in others' sexual lives, keeping sex out of the workplace is the most effective approach.

---

It was fun, but it didn't _quite_ work...

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#269

Post by jacques_chester » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:52 PM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #121

chongli wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not legal if employers specifically use it to disrupt employees’ attempts to organize. The NLRA specifically grants employees the right to organize and it prohibits employers from monitoring these organizing employees. The fact that Google employees, in this case, may not be considering forming a union at this time is irrelevant. The meetings they are having may prompt them to form one at a later time. Either wa…

Like it was a "safety hazard" to have too many people at once in the smoking area behind the textile mill. It is a slippery slope to try to tease apart what is, and what isn't, interference right? Google also has a clause in their employment agreement that says you agree to them putting surveillance software on your devices, company supplied and personal, as a condition of your employment. I asked about that one, got…

> Google also has a clause in their employment agreement that says you agree to them putting surveillance software on your devices, company supplied and personal, as a condition of your employment.

That doesn't mean it's enforceable or that it wouldn't run into statutory limits. Many workplace relations laws are written on a strict liability basis, intent isn't necessary for infringement. So if it has a chilling effect on organising, it's potentially infringing.

Mind you, there's something very rich in Google employees complaining about Chrome being used as a monitoring tool. Look around you, folks. What do you think pays for the fancy cafeteria? It's not hugs and smiles.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#270

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Nov 13, 2019, 12:53 PM UTC

Hitton wrote: post #248

say_it_as_it_is wrote: post #208

What we are seeing are the consequences of "Employee Capture". Google captured the hearts and minds of its employees for workplace productivity. Its side effects are varied. The real world only sees highlights. Googled created a bubble from which its employees can socialize without ever needing to do so with the outside world. Why talk politics with the outside world? Stay with us, where it is safe, people are intell…

Funny thing is, that although Google boasts about its racial and gender diversity, there is preciously little ideological diversity. And once people stray, they must be purged.

[deleted]