Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 772 posts

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#371

Post by waheoo »

janesvilleseo wrote: post #46
ditonal wrote: post #40

One thing that happens in SV is: * Employer says "hey, we have all these convenient corporate app, wouldn't it be nice to be able to check work messages and work docs on your mobile? Just install our app to "corp-ify" your phone" * Employer now views your mobile device as containing sensitive company IP and therefore they have the right to snoop on anything on your phone. If you install corp on your phone, Google vie…

100% agree. People laugh at me why I carry two phones but this is the main reason. If my employer needs me to have a mobile phone they are paying for separate device and plan. It’s a little silly I need to carry 2 phones around but it makes my life so much more convenient. Unknown call on my work phone guess I’ll answer. If it’s on my personal then it’s spam. Leave company, no need to update or port my number. Want t…

I'm far more practical, I use my own phone, or I can use work phone me for personal use without restriction and without rootkits.

If you require rootkits then the work phone is now a desk phone.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#372

Post by YokoZar »

splaytreemap wrote: post #295
inerte wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there anyone else that has every bypassed this step, but wasn't fired? What's the definition of an emergency? Also it seems reasonable to me her complaint that this hurt her reputation, after all you're a Google employee and here you are smearing her in a public board. I know you're gonna say "I don't speak for my company", to which I will reply: It seems you're a Google employee, and you're speaking as a Google e…

People bypass this step all the time. The difference is they all have a good faith belief their managers would approve the change if they were available. Spiers 100% knew her changes wouldn't be approved by project leadership, and she used an emergency push to bypass their review. Honestly, the fact that she has the gall to complain to the NLRB about this firing is pretty despicable. Google should be suing her for de…

> Honestly, the fact that she has the gall to complain to the NLRB about this firing is pretty despicable. Google should be suing her for defamation.

This is such an ill-informed understanding of how labor law works I'm not sure where to even start. You have a legal right to assert your legal rights, as was done here. The NLRB is akin to a trial court that makes the determination and issues judgements.

Winning a legal case is not "defamation".

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#373

Post by knorker »

What exactly did Google do? I can't find it.

Do note that one of the fired people installed an web interceptor onto all employee browsers, injecting content when certain websites were visited. Basically installed malware in the workplace.

I cannot think of anything less ethical to do when gives such access. If they were my coworker I would never be able to trust them with access to anything ever again.

To abuse such huge power for something so obviously ineffective and will-obviously-get-you-fired also shows a great lack of judgement. It was, bluntly, fucking stupid.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#374

Post by marcinzm »

birdyrooster wrote: post #321
twblalock wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The days where "being in IT" made you a rockstar that could command a premium in individual negotiations are, best I can tell, way in the past. Are you kidding? Salaries have never been higher in tech. Senior engineers make more than $400k (sometimes way more) at Google and other large companies. It is likely that engineers at FAANG companies would make less money if they join a union, because the union would level…

Parent comment read like some externalized imposter syndrome, but I agree unions are useful for extracting more value from employers. What isn't to love about that?

The fact that the people who get that value may not be you and that the employer may take value away from you to make up the difference.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#375

Post by kelnos »

waheoo wrote: post #359
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned this the hard way, and now insist upon a contract before agreeing to move to a company (i.e. I dont tell my previous job or give a start date until I see a contract). So far, it hasn't been a problem.

Isnt this job switching 101? you don't have a new job until you've signed. Your notice doesn't happen until you have signed.

"Signed" isn't what you think it is. You can sign the offer letter, and possibly a couple other things, but most companies will also have more documents that you must sign on your first day of employment, and won't give them to you before then.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#376

Post by ahelwer »

twblalock wrote: post #276
black_puppydog wrote: post #262

The whole thread here seems to revolve around whether or not Spiers should have been fired for what she did. And while I have a clear opinion on that and had fun sparring with y'all here about it, can we also talk about how unionization is actually something that we need to think about as a profession / group of professions? The days where "being in IT" made you a rockstar that could command a premium in individual n…

> The days where "being in IT" made you a rockstar that could command a premium in individual negotiations are, best I can tell, way in the past. Are you kidding? Salaries have never been higher in tech. Senior engineers make more than $400k (sometimes way more) at Google and other large companies. It is likely that engineers at FAANG companies would make less money if they join a union, because the union would level…

Here's a refutation: Microsoft spends $250k/employee/year on stock dividends and buybacks. That's quite a large slice of the pie the union could negotiate for.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#377

Post by colejohnson66 »

gowld wrote: post #360
colejohnson66 wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again. Destruction of evidence is a crime. Even if it’s not a choice for the user, the usage of such a feature would be a crime. And also again: the law and the courts don’t care about technicalities, no matter your opinion on that matter. People here are choosing to make things harder for themselves by coming up with ideas to skirt the law, but it doesn’t work and will only make the police go harder on you. The law…

Are you sure? This is a nuanced issue. Ehat counts as "usage". Intentionally destroying evidence is a crime, but broadly automatically destroying data before you have any knowledge of an allegation is not. (Otherwise, thinks lke GDPR would be illegal in the US)

We’re talking about depositions, so the knowledge of an investigation followed by destruction of the data (whether intention or not) by handing the device over would be a crime. I can’t hand my phone over to the police and remote wipe it with iCloud, for example.

Destruction when handing to a mugger is still ok.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#378

Post by kelnos »

gowld wrote: post #342
MereInterest wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it great when even something as huge and life-changing as a job is subject to a contract of adhesion with no negotiation allowed? I'm sure glad to live in such a free country with great worker rights. (Sarcasm intended.)

What would "negotiation allowed" mean? Negotiation includes saying "no". The remedy for that is labor law, not some right to negotiate. An interesting labor law challenge is "one side repeatedly making assertions that don't accord with contract, and I rely on those assertions, or the other side should be punished for making statements that suggest bad faith."

It's not much of a "negotiation" when the power imbalance is such that the employer can say no to your every request, but if you say no to any of theirs, you're unemployed.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#379

Post by wwtrv »

lucian1900 wrote: post #305
Asooka wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have with trade unions is that those usually start mandating how work is performed, rather than just acting as protectors of workers' rights. As a silly example, an IT Union could mandate that we all use tabs for indentation. In general the idea of unionising is appealing, but I don't want to end up in such a degenerate situation. I want an organisation that will protect my rights as a human being while…

Unions are democratic organisations, the whole point of them is for workers to gain power together. You’ll only get tabs enforced if the majority of workers agree that’s a useful rule to have.

This just reiterates what the parent comment said. In this case up to 49% of all workers who did not want to use tabs will be forced to.

Re: Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges

#380

Post by marcinzm »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #332
milesvp wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. This is how I've felt about unions since the grad students tried to unionize at my university, and all the hard science grad students would have lower salaries if the union came to fruition. So it's an effect that I would expect in general if good devs get grouped in with non devs. However, a former roomate's father owned a construction company and I was talked to him about unions once. I took the stance that…

>This is how I've felt about unions since the grad students tried to unionize at my university, and all the hard science grad students would have lower salaries if the union came to fruition How would they know what their salaries would be if they chose to unionize?

Most likely the union organizers said they'd do X, Y and Z if created. That included a more standardized salary across the board which benefits those making the least but hurts those making the most.
Post reply on HN