Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US labor board alleges • Hacker News Board

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

#731

Post by llampx » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 6:09 PM UTC

throwaway667555 wrote: post #282

MereInterest wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, that is the sort of solution I would expect the legal department to suggest as a counter-offer, with Google paying the difference. Having the legal department review contract changes is something I would expect to be standard for them, not a deal breaker. It is the reason for having the legal department there in the first place.

Some details of an offer & acceptance of employment are trivial and not worth spoiling good will. Me: "Hey manager, can I make an expense report for this work phone?" No matter the response, I'm ok with it, because I make Google money, and that's policy. I should work towards becoming management if I want that to change. But I probably have better things to do than such a trivial disagreement. I wish corporations wer…

> I wish corporations were less psychopathic, too, but this is not the hill I'd die on. Or, I'd be damn sure ready to die if I redlined as a "nice to meet you" first act.

And what does Google (and most companies) do as a "nice to meet you" first act? Present you with adhesion contracts that you must sign with barely enough time to go over them. Nice.

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

#732

Post by ehsankia » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 6:12 PM UTC

UncleMeat wrote: post #699

ehsankia wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really a black box though? The majority of these companies have spreadsheets where people share their salaries, and from what I've seen, it's a fairly basic formula based on 3 factors: Level, rating and location. Yes, there's maybe a few % of wiggle in there, but generally it's fairly consistent from what I've seen. You could argue that the way you get a rating, or even the way you get promoted are a black box,…

The point is that you have exactly zero say in it. The comp team spits out a number using a formula that changes year over year, then your manager has a little bit of wiggle room to allocate to high performers, and then you get your number. With zero advance warning they can absolutely just say "sorry, your performance review ratings are now worth 50% of what they were last year" and there is nothing you can do about…

Other than the formula being public (Which again doesn't make a difference since we already roughly know it), how much wiggle room would you have in a company with 50k+ employees? Would you have any more of a wiggle room than you did before? Is the union going to argue for your personal individual salary?

I think you're inflating an issue that happens when a company is really large, to an issue with lack of union.

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

#733

Post by drstewart » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 6:19 PM UTC

DangitBobby wrote: post #678

drstewart wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's some more labor history for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Hoffa

Is this supposed to convince people that unions are bad?

It's almost as if single links to Wikipedia don't really prove anything, isn't it?

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

#734

Post by thatfunkymunki » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 7:11 PM UTC

vlovich123 wrote: post #429

ahelwer wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an employee I might have $100k in MSFT stock after five years. Those buybacks gave me what, a few hundred/thousand bucks at most? Come on. For such a supposed math-literate profession this objection is weirdly common. If you get cash you can turn around and buy company stock. Nobody is stopping you. Unions would also certainly see the value in employee ownership of stock, which broadly aligns with ideas of workers…

People also seem to think that RSU grants somehow appreciate in value before they vest. They do not. If you sign for 400k of RSUs over 4 years with a 1 year cliff and the stock rockets up 2x just before your first vest and then plateaus, you’re still getting only 400k. There’s literally no difference to a regular salary except you get paid out twice and it makes taxes more annoying because you have to pay estimated t…

FB grants RSUs based on an initial value at hire time translated into a total number of stock units that then vests over 4 years. So if the stock doubles, your comp doubles.

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

#735

Post by oh_sigh » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 7:12 PM UTC

Ar-Curunir wrote: post #607

oh_sigh wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you tell me concrete ways in which the average googler SWE's life will improve if they join a union?

You don't get fired like this? https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334341991795142667

It sounds like someone said "Do X or I quit", and the management chose the latter. What exactly is wrong with that?

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

#736

Post by alecco » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 7:21 PM UTC

AshWolfy wrote: post #603

alecco wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory, I would love an IT union. But in practice it's likely to turn into another extortion racket by a small cabal of sleazy fat men. And they will stay in power appealing to the lowest of the low flattening salaries and destroying meritocracy. With sadness I have to say, no thanks.

Unions are democracies, unions only get that way when people dont engage

Yes, and for a hierarchy of competence the lazy bottom feeders who are in IT only for the big salary end up out-voting career people who care about doing a good job. No, thank you.

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

#737

Post by Karunamon » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 7:47 PM UTC

bonoboTP wrote: post #717

Karunamon wrote: post #705

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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 contradicti…

No offense taken. My point here is that this entire process of "changing the contract" was unnecessary on its face, and everyone involved knew it. The professional thing to do would have been to not spend the cycles even pursuing it.

It's like asking what the best way to write a lisp in INTERCAL would be. The best way is to not do it.

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

#738

Post by sneak » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:21 PM UTC

lucian1900 wrote: post #685

sneak wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> peer pressure kicks in because the "freeriders" effectively get protection from the union without pulling their weight. I would much rather the peer pressure be applied to those writing the checks, by their competition.

Their peers have the same material interests to keep wages low in order to keep profits high, so they rarely side with the workers. There are many documented cases of explicit collusion, even. It's why it's important for workers to act collectively. Since they can threaten the owners' profits through strike, there is much more leverage.

I'm wary of centralized power of any kind, but explicitly coordinated centralized power (in the form of industry-wide unions) scares me just as much as explicitly-illegal-to-coordinate-but-aligned-incentives power in the form of a set of a few gigantic employers.

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

#739

Post by caconym_ » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:45 PM UTC

ehsankia wrote: post #732

UncleMeat wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that you have exactly zero say in it. The comp team spits out a number using a formula that changes year over year, then your manager has a little bit of wiggle room to allocate to high performers, and then you get your number. With zero advance warning they can absolutely just say "sorry, your performance review ratings are now worth 50% of what they were last year" and there is nothing you can do about…

Other than the formula being public (Which again doesn't make a difference since we already roughly know it), how much wiggle room would you have in a company with 50k+ employees? Would you have any more of a wiggle room than you did before? Is the union going to argue for your personal individual salary? I think you're inflating an issue that happens when a company is really large, to an issue with lack of union.

I think the point here is that if $BIGCORP makes some unpopular compensation change that affects many employees (e.g. reducing the weighting of performance in the pay formula, reducing base pay relative to RSUs, etc.), a union would give employees a way to push back on those changes and/or negotiate for some other concessions in return.

Actually, I imagine a $BIGCORP workers' union to be much more involved in this kind of negotiation than e.g. in demanding that wages be flat with no room for pay increases based on merit, which is the usual FUD that anti-union folks roll out in these conversations.

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

#740

Post by UncleMeat » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 9:55 PM UTC

ehsankia wrote: post #732

UncleMeat wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that you have exactly zero say in it. The comp team spits out a number using a formula that changes year over year, then your manager has a little bit of wiggle room to allocate to high performers, and then you get your number. With zero advance warning they can absolutely just say "sorry, your performance review ratings are now worth 50% of what they were last year" and there is nothing you can do about…

Other than the formula being public (Which again doesn't make a difference since we already roughly know it), how much wiggle room would you have in a company with 50k+ employees? Would you have any more of a wiggle room than you did before? Is the union going to argue for your personal individual salary? I think you're inflating an issue that happens when a company is really large, to an issue with lack of union.

> Is the union going to argue for your personal individual salary?

Probably not. But they might be able to prevent the company from suddenly reducing everybody's equity compensation by 20% or whatever. A huge amount of compensation at large tech companies is completely discretionary. Nothing prevents large tech companies from eliminating huge swathes of bonus and equity pay, other than people leaving the company. A union can make it so you have other recourse.