351–360 of 421 posts
This is literally one of the craziest things I have ever seen. Google is doing absolutely nothing wrong or unethical at all. The guy got fired because he started accusing Google of racism. Wow. Just wow. The sense of entitlement and self-righteousness is just mind blowing.
I didn't watch his video clip, but the article read like a very curious person looking into a weirdness. Kind of like a journalist....
I used to work at Google and the "class system" was something that grated on me from time to time. I didn't know any yellow badge folks myself, and was ignorant of their existence, just as the article mentions. But red badges (contractors) are ubiquitous. In one case they fired all the QA contractors and made them reapply for their own jobs -- we're talking about people who had deep knowledge of certain projects, who…
For crying out loud, it's not a "class system" it's company hierarchy. Contract workers are not employees they are temporary hired hands they get fired and reallocated on company whim for company purposes, that is the nature of their jobs, they are easier to fire and hire than full time 401k employees. Not everyone gets the company car home with them. What disturbs me is that you keep pointing to the fact that they a…
Well, I don't agree that those things are that different.
But I will agree with you that having a company hierarchy is pretty normal.
>What disturbs me is that you keep pointing to the fact that they are mostly minorities as if Google deliberately chose minority workers for these jobs, the sad fact is that these low end jobs are typically occupied by minorities.
You're right, and I don't mean to imply that Google somehow caused this situation. Like any employer, Google tries to get the most value for its money, and that entails selection of people from particular backgrounds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
US seem like horrible country to work in. You are expected to donate unpaid overtime to your company, you can be fired on a whim. What else?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They might be contracted by another company with shittier terms. And Google doesn't have to make it's inner workings public.
No, they don't. But things have a way of squeaking out anyways. For better or worse, Google bears the burden of being characterized as a geek Shangri-La; where justice and intelligence reign supreme and everyone gets richer. Is it fair? No. But Google's used that perception a lot in the past and their justifiably worried about losing that good reputation, given their increasing difficulties with retention and hiring.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like your rephrasing of my statement on the love of money. You wrote: "My take is that the blind pursuit of money, to the detriment of other considerations, is the root of (some/all) evil." My feeling is that as you get more money, as it becomes more of a goal to you, the more likely it is that you will pursue money to the detriment of other considerations. I'll have think about your last statement. The one about t…
"Is the U.S. rich in happiness? contentment? My perception is no." Happiness is relative. Struggling to scrape by on a dollar a day, and wondering where your next meal is going to come from must be pretty awful. Perhaps more people should do volunteer work to realise just how lucky we have it in the west. I think that by being wealthier, you can "move up" Maslow's Hierarchy of Human Needs[1], and if you reach 'self-a…
We agree on these points (so it seems to me from what you've written).
Where we appear to have divergence is in my belief that
1. Capitalism does not do an adequate job of dealing with negative externalities.
2. The general mind altering, world view altering aspect of money acquisition makes dealing with the negative externalities difficult. The "I've got mine, fuck you" attitude that is prevalent amongst the monied class in the U.S. makes me think that it is especially difficult in the U.S. for things to change for the better.
3. The rate of resource destruction, pollution, etc., along with 1) and 2) makes me think that world will become one big, giant toxic shit hole before adequate steps are taken to deal with the negative externalities and by that time it will be too late.
My personal belief is that it is highly unlikely the human race will survive the next 200 years in anywhere near the numbers it has today.
--------
As to defense spending. It is true that Silicon Valley exists because of defense spending. I don't believe it is true that it would not exist (somewhere else perhaps) without defense spending. I think progress would still have occurred in computing and technology without defense spending.
Thanks for the discussion.
There may be a perfectly good reason for Google to exclude contractors from the "Googly perks": the Microsoft lawsuit.
If Google treats the contractors just like its employees, then the contractors can turn around and sue Google. Google needs to maintain a distinction between contractors and FTEs. Recall the Microsoft lawsuit filed by contractors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permatemp
To my knowledge, cultural hierarchy is very standard within pretty much all companies regardless of size. Not everyone gets a company car, their own office, the same health benefits, or if you are privileged enough to work at a company that provides them, the same gourmet lunch as has been stated elsewhere in these comments. Furthermore, the existence of sub-hierarchy (contract and temporary) workers is very common in larger companies. To my understanding, these temp and contract workers usually enjoy few if any benefits provided by the company as they are rarely actually employed by the company they are working for but rather an agency.
In addition to this, it is pretty standard procedure to ban all unauthorized taping on company campuses. If anything, to my uninformed mind the fact that an employee got as far as actually taking unauthorized video footage is if anything a credit to Google's openness (or whatever you want to call it).
So, I guess my question is: Where is the interesting aspect of this? Is the popularity of this really just due to the "divulging" that Google employs workers that aren't provided the same benefits as some of its other workers? Is it the existence of a "class system" in Google to show worker's authority/hierarchy level? If it is one of these reasons, there must be something else I'm missing as without having seen this story I would have just assumed that these things existed at Google.
I ask this as a sincere question as obviously this has gained the attention of a large portion of this community which I hold as very intelligent. I am driven to assume that whatever it is that is engaging about this story is simply going over my head.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For crying out loud, it's not a "class system" it's company hierarchy. Contract workers are not employees they are temporary hired hands they get fired and reallocated on company whim for company purposes, that is the nature of their jobs, they are easier to fire and hire than full time 401k employees. Not everyone gets the company car home with them. What disturbs me is that you keep pointing to the fact that they a…
>it's not a "class system" it's company hierarchy Well, I don't agree that those things are that different. But I will agree with you that having a company hierarchy is pretty normal. >What disturbs me is that you keep pointing to the fact that they are mostly minorities as if Google deliberately chose minority workers for these jobs, the sad fact is that these low end jobs are typically occupied by minorities. You'r…
In the corporate world however it's just a chain of command, it is used to distill order to some extent and typically is claimable by those who succeed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Wrongful termination" is largely a myth. I know a lot of educated professionals who believe they have the right to a "fair" termination, but except for very specific instances, it isn't the case, and these threats go nowhere. In most cases, unless there is a smoking gun, employers just sidestep the issue by targeting "layoffs", rather firing for cause. The bigger issue HR deals with is sexual harassment or discrimin…
I myself have witnessed the "layoff with a nice severance bonus". It actually seems to work out nicely for both parties.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I read that phrase, I was thinking he MUST have known it was going to get him fired.
Why would being interested in sociological issues get him fired?
Well, I say that, but with the naivety on show in this thread perhaps this guy is onto a winner with 'sociological issues'.