Workers Leaving the Googleplex • Hacker News Board

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#91

Post by pstack » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:00 AM UTC

gradstudent wrote: post #86

tkahn6 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he was fired for using Google video equipment during working hours. Even though he'd been given explicit permission to do so. Yes they used that as a reason to fire him but that's not why they fired him.

Perhaps things are different in the U.S. but here -- in Australia -- you can only be fired for breach of contract. If that didn't occur, as the blog post seems to suggest, then he was unfairly dismissed.

As dangrossman points out, above, you can be fired for any reason whatsoever, on the spot. I believe the only protections are sex, race, gender, religion, and age. And as for sex, that means you can't be fired for being a male or a female. It has nothing to do with sexual orientation, for which you can still be fired in something like two or three dozen states. (Look into the ENDA which has been repeatedly proposed for the past 17 years, but never passed -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Non-Discrimination_A... ).

And for those things which are protected, there is often little you can do. Prove that they fired you for being too old and not just because you smelled bad or performed poorly at work or pissed the wrong person off.

It therefore isn't really concerning that someone would not want to deal with the hassle of some jackass and would just ask for him to be fired, instead.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#92

Post by kamaal » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:01 AM UTC

quizbiz wrote: post #14

Honestly, I'm not sure this is a big deal. They're hiring unskilled labor and giving them a role at an extraordinary company. A rational management team wanting to generate profits for risk taking investors and generate new growth, cuts costs by eliminating benefits when possible. They could easily get this done in India or China. If they are really doing book scanning, I'm shocked this isn't being done in the far ea…

This is like saying - 'I gave you a job so now I can treat you the way I want'. This sort of attitude is what fueled passions for communism. It keeps labor unions alive and general strikes perfectly acceptable. Because the employers some how have a attitude that they own employees and they are doing some great favor without which employees would have to starve to death.Giving job to someone is two way business, The guy needs you and you need the guy.

I would take serious offense if my employer tries to behave like god and then treat me like a dog. It hurts more if the treatment is subjective, meaning a few people are treated well and a few aren't. And even more if I'm meted out such treatment solely on the basis of my color, religion or any other thing like for example sexual preference.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#93

Post by sgentle » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:05 AM UTC

guard-of-terra wrote: post #58

I think that many commenters are missing the point. The question isn't whether Google is goind anything strictly illegal. The question is whether Google is doing something what would be considered shady by a big part of Google employees; If so, how would Google acknowlege the situation; And then, how would they live thru this, with Googlers knowing that their own standards are in a serious mismatch with the actual be…

Yeah, I'm genuinely surprised by the tone here. I mean, clearly the things he wrote were a bit inflammatory, but it seems like most of the commenters have shockingly low standards for what constitutes a fair firing.

Am I to expect that if you were working at a company and you brought an allegation of racism to your superiors, you should be fired because that allegation makes them uncomfortable or could lead to legal trouble? Would everyone here be jumping up and down to say how correct that is?

I obviously only have one side of the story, but I can't think of a way that firing someone for talking to the wrong people or asking the wrong questions is right. Not even if it's Google doing it.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#94

Post by Humourisok » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:07 AM UTC

Enough people on the planet would happily subscribe to Google 4th class (even 5th)

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#95

Post by jrockway » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:24 AM UTC

reubenyeah wrote: post #74

jrockway wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I work at a company where the CEO gets a corporate jet, that jet becomes a "human right"?

No, but if you work at a company where even the janitors get free lunch, you should get free lunch.

But if the programmers that get free lunch are working for below-industry wages, and the data-entry people are getting industry wages, isn't it the people with the free lunch that are getting screwed over?

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#96

Post by matheusalmeida » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:30 AM UTC

I'm scared! Am I the only one that sees no big deal about scanning books? What is so secretive about it? I think they are doing an amazing job and I'd love to know how many books they can scan every day, etc...

The second thing is that I don't understand why are you calling him racist. I believe that things in the USA are quite different from I'm used to.. You can get sued for anything. I heard that an employer can get sued for asking things like age, sex, height, color during an interview for a job.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#97

Post by paganel » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:32 AM UTC

tkahn6 wrote: post #57

gradstudent wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the point: the guy was fired for recording conversations with other employees. After being given permission from his supervisor to do exactly that. On his lunch break. Wtf is that all about?

You missed the part where he kept talking about race and unequal treatment and the ScanOps people of being mostly 'people of color'. He said these things explicitly in his letter that Google Legal reviewed. That is exactly why he was fired. Google did the absolutely correct thing. They don't want to deal with that shit. There's no conspiracy.

> They don't want to deal with that shit. There's no conspiracy.

I totally agree with you. Why would any Übermensch in his right mind eat and drink in the same room as a yellow-badged Untermensch? That's heresy.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#98

Post by paganel » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:36 AM UTC

mruniverse wrote: post #69

Uhhrrr wrote: post #2

Note to young videographers: When a company asks whether you're working on an expose, the phrase "I’m interested in issues of class, race, and labor" will not defuse the situation.

That's hilarious. His letter to Ralph was so passive–aggressive. I would have left out these nuggets: 1)... now that I know it's so super-secret 2)... are mostly people of color and cannot eat Google meals 3)... I wasn’t approaching this as an act of muckraking 4)... nice way to meet people who work right next to me but are very clearly not the same class as me

> 2)... are mostly people of color and cannot eat Google meals

That's a bummer, because those were indeed people of color who were not allowed to eat Google meals. Well, at least I know why it took you guys in the States 100 years to actually give equal rights to your fellow black citizens: you were all too afraid of losing your jobs.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#99

Post by doe88 » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:38 AM UTC

pstack wrote: post #91

gradstudent wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps things are different in the U.S. but here -- in Australia -- you can only be fired for breach of contract. If that didn't occur, as the blog post seems to suggest, then he was unfairly dismissed.

As dangrossman points out, above, you can be fired for any reason whatsoever, on the spot. I believe the only protections are sex, race, gender, religion, and age. And as for sex, that means you can't be fired for being a male or a female. It has nothing to do with sexual orientation, for which you can still be fired in something like two or three dozen states. (Look into the ENDA which has been repeatedly proposed f…

> the hassle of some jackass

nice

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#100

Post by notahacker » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 10:44 AM UTC

guard-of-terra wrote: post #53

Uchikoma wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So not getting rides to Disney Land is the same as being worked to death? Way off doesn't begin to describe how screwed your comparison is.

So not being permitted to speak to other employees is the same as not getting rides to Disney Land? Way off doesn't begin to describe how screwed your comparison is.

Specifically, they're not permitted to speak to other employees about the apparently confidential work they're doing, which presumably was mentioned to them when they went to the job interview round about the same time they were advised they'd be missing out on a few other social events. Even the original author doesn't seem to be suggesting they're being held and silenced against their will...