Workers Leaving the Googleplex • Hacker News Board

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#211

Post by pkteison » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 3:58 PM UTC

jxcole wrote: post #191

Interesting. My Dad once sued microsoft because they had many "temporary" workers who did not get the full benefit of full time workers. These workers were labelled as contract workers however, he was able to win his case because at the end of the day, they were working full time for Microsoft. Not only that, they were often employed by microsoft for many years, even though the claim was generally that these employee…

I'm sorry, but this 'they wouldn't care' garbage is so obviously wrong that my 'someone is wrong on the internet' reflex has kicked in.

You have never done anything that is legal, ethical, moral, and fine, but you still don't want the whole world to see it? You've never seen a tv report or a youtube clip where somebody took something perfectly fine and tried to make it sinister to get more views? You'd be ok if I decided to truman show your life? And, thinking you'd be ok, you're then willing to inflict that same decision upon others, who might feel very differently about attention than you do?

Star Wars Kid didn't want the world to see him goofing off. I don't want you to have videotape of me bumming around the house on the weekend. An employer would probably prefer that their public image be a planned and staged PR event rather than footage of the christmas party winding down. There's nothing illegal going on, there is nothing sinister about these desires, we just don't want you presenting us to the world in this manner. Why should we?

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#212

Post by learc83 » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 4:06 PM UTC

exit wrote: post #119

learc83 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, if you classify slave labor as someone voluntarily doing work for which they get paid.

there's nothing voluntary about participation in capitalism.

So you want to change the scope of the argument to: all Google employees are plantation slave labor?

Ask yourself this--if any plantation slaves were alive today, would they agree with your comparison?

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#213

Post by yequalsx » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 4:08 PM UTC

patrickk wrote: post #155

leon_ wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany here. I'm with you on this one. But you must understand that HN is full of to-be-millionaires who are pursuing the american dream. Morality has no place in their lives.

Is there some law that says it's impossible to pursue riches and simultaneously be a moral person? I'm European too by the way. Your comment is inflammatory and unnecessary.

I'm an American (but grew up in Panama).

My experience in the U.S. is that Americans tend to believe a company has no moral responsibility beyond maximizing profits and not violating laws. Even when companies do violate the law (Enron, Horizon, Chevron, etc.) there is a segment of society that rushes to minimize the wrongdoing.

My anecdotal experience on HN is that a lot people on the site defend the pursuit of money over what I consider greater moral considerations. I can understand the perspective of the person you responded to. His/her comment was inflammatory and you are right about that.

To answer your question though, I do believe that it is roughly true that pursuing riches makes it harder to be a moral person. It's not impossible but I do believe it is harder. It is my belief that in a majority of cases one's morality and perception of what is right/wrong/acceptable changes for the worse as they acquire more money.

I believe it is true that the love of money is the root of all evil (as a rough approximation).

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#214

Post by hollerith » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 4:09 PM UTC

Maro wrote: post #71

strictfp wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me it's much more shocking to what great length you go to defend the rights of the company. It seems to me that freedom of speech should come before the right of firing at will. Or is your opinion that companies are about as souverign as states?

IANAL, but I think there are some things you can't fire people for, like race, age, being pregnant, etc. But other than that, I'd think you're free to 'fire at will'.

Please call it "at-will employment". "Fire at will" is a command given to riflemen.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#215

Post by sscheper » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 4:11 PM UTC

Wishes the voiceover was by Morgan Freeman.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#216

Post by hieronymusN » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 4:13 PM UTC

jxcole wrote: post #191

Interesting. My Dad once sued microsoft because they had many "temporary" workers who did not get the full benefit of full time workers. These workers were labelled as contract workers however, he was able to win his case because at the end of the day, they were working full time for Microsoft. Not only that, they were often employed by microsoft for many years, even though the claim was generally that these employee…

I worked for a large, international financial data company that was busted for something very similar. In essence they had a large amount of contract employees on premises (hired through a temp agency) that had worked for them for years, at desks amongst the regular employees, with the same email addresses as the regular employees, etc. They were indistinguishable from regular employees except they did not get pensions, paid leave, or any of the other perks of regular employees.

When a few were made redundant due to cutbacks, they promptly lawyered up and were able to settle for a year's worth of compensation, which is what they would have received as regular employees.

In short, if you're a contractor but have a desk in the office and an email address with the company in some cases you are more or less an 'employee', and this has been backed up by courts in the US from time to time.

http://employeeissues.com/ic_vs_employee.htm

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#217

Post by hollerith » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 4:15 PM UTC

exit wrote: post #118

jrockway wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

they're both getting screwed. getting screwed by capitalists is not a zero sum economy.

Someone does not know what a zero-sum transaction is.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#218

Post by prostoalex » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 4:17 PM UTC

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #54

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…

Apparently Google feels that this situation does not fit the public image they want to project so the want to keep it under wraps. My opinion is that their behaviour isn't exactly evil and probably not unusual but it's uninspiring, uncreative and not up to standard with their approach to other matters. It's a missed opportunity. They have all these people together on the campus so why would they reinforce the existin…

A Google employee is contributing to short-term disability fund with every paycheck, and in case he slips on cafeteria or bus floor, state of California will cover their portion of worker's comp.

A contractor is not eligible for worker's comp, hence any possibility of injury at workplace would make Google liable for contractor's entire medical bill.

http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_independentcontractor.htm

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#219

Post by joelangeway » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 4:18 PM UTC

Sapient wrote: post #55

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.

When I read that phrase, I was thinking he MUST have known it was going to get him fired.

I hope I never have to work for someone who'll fire me if I tell them I'm interested in issues of class or race.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#220

Post by exit » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 4:18 PM UTC

bane wrote: post #178

I don't think he understands how contractors work (Google didn't hire you you git, Google contracted your company and your company placed you there to fill the contract) or hourly labor works (you don't get privileges or benefits), so he turns it into a ridiculous conspiracy. Breaking news! Google has hourly employees! - You don't say?! Google has contractors! - Really?! Let's explore the narcissistic exploration of…

> And yes, please keep this post up so other companies know not to hire you either.

i think this is an interesting common characteristic of attacks on the articles author - the direct or subtle reminder that he failed to act in his own self interest vis a vis employment. this is how capitalists want us to frame everything - in terms of narrow self interest.