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

711–720 of 772 posts

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

#711

Post by sudosysgen »

dleslie wrote: post #640
sudosysgen wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your employers are interested in their interest. If you're going to be using your money in an interest category where your win is their loss, they were care proportionally to your effectiveness, no matter the methods. Now : >How could they not be? The ability to advocate for yourself has been given to someone else, over something as intimately personal and important as the labour you undertake for the majority of you…

I mostly donate to NGOs and political parties directly; I get to see my dollars go directly to those who help those in need, and as a party member I get the opportunity to shake hands with legislators and talk policy with them directly. I helped get the husband of a friend elected mayor of my city. This has had a meaningful impact. I see unions having enormous utility for those living where there is effectively one e…

Unions don't have to be limited to a single employer, and their actual advantage isn't any of that, their actual advantage is that they allow you to effectively withhold your labour, which is even more effective if you are in high demand.

In any case, I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors.

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

#712

Post by bichiliad »

drstewart wrote: post #660
bichiliad wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that google is suppressing wages today won't show up on levels.fyi today. It will show up 5 years from now, and by then it'll be a lot harder to unionize.

He says it's been happening for years so it should already be showing up. Care to prove it?

The point is that they've had anti-wage practices for years, but that they recently reduced top-level payout. I'm not able to find a year-by-year comparison for pay bands at Google on levels.fyi, so I'm not sure what your point is with that site.

I don't work at Google, so proving that Google specifically is cutting wages isn't something I'm able to do. At the same time, I don't think you need to prove that Google's incentivized to maximize profits. They're a publicly traded company; there will always be motivation for them to reduce costs. If you're in search of proof, the anti-poaching lawsuit[0] is not something to take lightly.

And either way, I don't see you bringing up any strong arguments against collective action. Just because Google might not be doing something to reduce compensation right this second doesn't mean they don't have the power to do that in the future.

[0]:https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-google-others-settle-anti-po...

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

#713

Post by dekhn »

munk-a wrote: post #291
qmarchi wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, as a Google employee, they do. If you don't want to run corp software, you can easily just request a corporate phone and that's that.

It is unfortunate (and a reflection of the power imbalance in US employment) that Google doesn't simply offer a corporate phone as a matter of practice - it benefits both the employee and the employer in the long run (with dishonest actions put aside).

I have always been able to get a phone when working at Google by just asking for it and pointing out that I occasionally answer questions or help debug big problems outside of work hours.

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

#714

Post by icedistilled »

austhrow743 wrote: post #554
brundolf wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of whether or not IT professionals should be worried about their salaries, labor power isn't just about compensation. Unions could negotiate for better parental leave (which is still atrocious throughout the US, even in relatively cushy jobs). Unions could empower tech workers to actually push back on unethical policies and projects, as opposed to right now where they get to make a statement and then nothi…

Parental leave is part of compensation. It's just extra cash but with strings attached. Things like parental leave are exactly why some people don't like collective bargaining. It means you get stuck being compensated with something you're not going to use instead of cash.

You must dislike taxes funding schools too. And taxes funding roads in states you'll never visit.

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

#715

Post by lokar »

bonoboTP wrote: post #583
lokar wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What we know is one person said that's what happened. I certainly know of people who have suggested and gotten changes to agreements like this. But you need to be professional about it.

What do you mean by professional here? My guess is some mix of emotional detachment, serious tone and use of the right jargon and vocabulary?

I'd get a lawyer to advise on the text and the change, make sure it really means what you think it does. And talk to them about your concerns, explain why you want the change. Make it clear you are open to other reasonable solutions.

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

#716

Post by Supermancho »

black_puppydog wrote: post #397
wwtrv wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's not gonna be a very successful union then. The unions I know that actually work are near-universal, but you're never technically required to join. However, at certain levels of unionization, peer pressure kicks in because the "freeriders" effectively get protection from the union without pulling their weight.

> The unions I know that actually work are near-universal, but you're never technically required to join

"that actually work" - what does this mean?

There are lots of functioning unions that require you to join, to work. Teacher's Unions & Screen Actor's Guild immediately spring to mind.

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

#717

Post by bonoboTP »

Karunamon wrote: post #705
bonoboTP wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not an answer to the above thread.

"What do you mean by professional here?", the answer to which is "not being a PITA for no reason". Seems pretty direct to me.

The comment I replied to claimed that being professional about requesting a change to your contract can get you the requested change approved, implying that being unprofessional will get you kicked out. My question was, how to be professional in the way that will get your change more likely to be accepted. If you claim that you can not get the change approved in any way, then you are not answering me, but contradicting the comment I was replying to. Sorry if breaking it down like this seems condescending.

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

#718

Post by JPKab »

Yajirobe wrote: post #7
JPKab wrote: post #3

[flagged]

> His Orangeness Please refrain from insults. Nearly half of the voters voted for him. There are plenty of his supporters here and this is offensive to them.

My wife voted for him. She thinks it's funny, because she's doesn't take herself seriously in the narcissistic way that has become fashionable online these days.

I love how we have to nerf the world instead of asking people to not be so desperate to be offended.

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

#719

Post by JPKab »

andrewzah wrote: post #229
Yajirobe wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> His Orangeness Please refrain from insults. Nearly half of the voters voted for him. There are plenty of his supporters here and this is offensive to them.

People shouldn't be so invested in a politician that a cheeky nickname for that politician actually offends them. This is a case of actively choosing to be offended about something. Now, as far as HN etiquette goes, factually just referring to politicians by their name would be better. Not because nicknames are oh-so-offensive (which, by the way, implies their supporters cannot handle even nicknames...) but because n…

As I said elsewhere in the thread, my wife voted for him, and finds my ribbing nicknames hilarious. She learned, like I did as a kid, that choosing to be offended by something is a weakness and a distraction.

It's as if it's become a currency of sorts now, where I can show virtue and get attention by calling someone else out for their gross misdeed of thinking that people are adults who don't need the world nerfed for them.

Clearly, I was wrong.

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

#720

Post by nwsm »

discordance wrote: post #464
nwsm wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have Teams installed on my iPhone. How does that give my company access to anything of mine?

Most corp IT teams require employees to install a mobile device management profile, which enables you to then run teams, get email access etc. it’s also what gives your company privileges on your phone. Some MDM profiles can have pretty nasty access enabled (e.g. route all IP traffic via Corp net, access device location at all times, remote wipe etc). Take a look at what your MDM profile says if you have one installe…

I see. I have Teams installed through the app store; my company doesn't have much guidance on mobile usage so I guess I'm safe.
Post reply on HN