Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Workers Leaving the Googleplex
131–140 of 421 posts
Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex
#132Minor point of clarification, as the tone of many comments seems to presume that google fired the author of this blog. This could be, but seems unlikely based on the blog.
The author was not employed by Google, but by a contracting firm hired by Google. The author's actions spooked the owner of the contracting firm, who did not want to risk his relationship and business with Google.
The author even reports his direct phone conversation with the owner of the firm. "He told me the issue was very serious because it could jeopardize Transvideos contract with Google and potentially lead to 60 people losing their jobs."
That is, if Google ended their relationship with Transvideo, then the sixty people Transvideo hired to work the Google contract would lose their jobs.
Google security may or may not have asked the firm to fire the author. Most likely, however, I suspect the firm took the decision on its own as the simplest, cleanest and quickest way to end an issue before the lower level google security staff finished drafting a report that may have risked Transvideo's relationship with Google.
So, as the owner of the firm what would you do? The choices are:
a) support an employee who plans to quit in two months, but before he does wants to use his job to investigate "issues of class, race, and labor". The downside is that Google might decide to work with a different firm, thereby causing you to fire the 60 people you hired to support the contract and perhaps lose your entire business.
b) Terminate the employee to protect your business and the sixty people who work to support it.
Not a pleasant decision, to be sure, but the choice seems obvious even if Google says nothing.
Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
I believe he's advocating not sabotaging oneself while examining issues of class, race, and labour. The author's ability to investigate this from the inside is now gone, because he got fired.
advocating a self interested "keep your job, stupid" perspective is very much siding in favor of perpetuating the system
Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex
#134Earlier 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.
> 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 was a huge mistake on his part.
> Google did the absolutely correct thing. They don't want to deal with that shit
From whose perspective? What I mean is that it's possible for them to do something that is "absolutely correct" for their own self-preservation / convenience, but that is not correct from an ethical or societal stand-point.
I'm not saying they're doing anything wrong. It just seems that you're angry that the OP wanted to investigate race / class issues.
Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
[deleted]
I deleted that comment before I saw you replied. But the gist of it:
-It was a descriptive comment - looking at what probably happened, not judging right/wrong.
-I think saying things like, "So you advocate ignoring issues of class, race and labor?" is bad form. If you think class, race, and labor is important, just say "I think it's an important issue." - insinuating someone else's beliefs leads to miscommunication, especially because people skim.
Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
I deleted that comment before I saw you replied. But the gist of it: -It was a descriptive comment - looking at what probably happened, not judging right/wrong. -I think saying things like, "So you advocate ignoring issues of class, race and labor?" is bad form. If you think class, race, and labor is important, just say "I think it's an important issue." - insinuating someone else's beliefs leads to miscommunication,…
Agreed, sorry.
I believe this is important to explore, and reading this thread saw only Google apologists of every stripe. I wanted (too badly) to see something substantive said. I should have just said it.
Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Assume each "Google Meal" costs $5 in preparation labour, materials, plates & utensils (washing), fittings and fixtures, etc...
261 working days a year 1 employee $5 = $1305 per employee, per year How many workers in the 3.14 building? At 400 employees, that's half a million dollars. Does the board of director's fiduciary duty to their shareholders allow them to pay for the Scan Ops lunches?
I don't know what minimum wage in the states is, but I'm pretty sure most of those workers would rather have that extra five dollars in their pockets and brown-bag it. It's also a lot easier to justify an extra dollar an hour above minimum wage.
"Catered lunches" is a perk that (as far as I know) is very rare. Your company "not buying you lunch every day" is the norm.
I can't see any outrage in their perfectly normal behavior.
Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
No accusations were leveled and, as far as I can tell, at best, Google overreacted. To make an analogy: the guy points out the sky is blue and he's promptly fired. Wtf?
Mentioning the word "race", "class", or "gender" in a tech setting is a big no-no. They're huge hot-button words.
It scares people and they counter-attack reflexively, without deeply considering the arguments. That's been my experience from work, Reddit, and HN, in any case.
Notice that I'm not saying anything about the correctness of any particular position on a specific issue. It's that the specifics are barely able to be discussed because people are already in war mode.
Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex
#139Hey, first I am from Egypt. Second, I have to admit, I am kind of struct by most of the comments here. Most of the comment are pro google and think andrew here got it for himself. I believe this have to do a lot with cultural differences here. Most people in Egypt, would stand with the employee against the corporation. Most egyptians would definitely be pro andrew. I believe the reason here is that most Egyptians are…
You have to understand that in the US there has been a significant anti-labor campaign, both in the media and in politics for at least the last 40 or 50 years. It's been reasonably effective, and took serious hold in the 1980's - many of the posters here have grown up in a world where labor issues are mostly only discussed in a context of how worker demands are holding back corporations. It's difficult to not have your attitudes effectively co-opted if you're only exposed to one side of the argument for most of your life.
Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe he's advocating not sabotaging oneself while examining issues of class, race, and labour. The author's ability to investigate this from the inside is now gone, because he got fired.
advocating a self interested "keep your job, stupid" perspective is very much siding in favor of perpetuating the system
I am advocating a "keep your job, so you can continue the investigation, stupid" perspective.
I thought that was clear.