Live data from Hacker News

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

theverge.com

751–760 of 772 posts

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

#751

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was un are of this system until I hired in the US. It blows my mind. Here (Germany) offer letters are used to outline the general terms of an offer however the next step will then be that you’re sent a contract (some of mine have been > 10 pages) outlining a lot of relevant things such: - role (ideally even with a job description but that is rare) - place of employment (city/country) - IP assignment - length of pro…

If you want to know, the same system happens in Japan too. When you get the offer letter it's an outline only. Then you either accept the offer letter as it is, or walk away. Asking for the detailed contract (called 就業規則 in Japanese) will always end up losing your job offer, because you have no legal right to see the contract before you join the company. Some companies are so hostile (and this is the norm in my exper…

Well, Japan also has this thing that a written contract isn't even needed to start employer-employee relationship, oral agreement is technically enough, difficult to prove of course so everyone does written contracts, but still.

Regarding details, well, there is a list of things mandated by law to be included in the offer, they include things like salary, hours, list of additional allowances (手当), though not necessarily all of them, retirement pay and such, so you should be able to receive that information without even asking. In my, albeit not very numerous, experiences in one case I've got something called 雇用契約書兼労働条件通知書 ("Employment Contract And Notice Of Working Conditions") , which included all the details, and in the other case I've got a separate 雇用契約書 (Employment contract), which included generic things like "you work for me, I pay you for that, don't go spreading company secrets around", and 労働契約書 (Labor contract), which included all the details like salary and whatnot. I should probably note, however, that I've only asked for and received these things after we were finished with all the interviews and reached a 内定 (the employer making an internal decision to hire the worker. It's nothing official, just a word to describe the state of the person(s) responsible being okay with the idea). I just politely asked for documents to review before I make my final decision, and while I've never received 授業規則 even after asking, they happily obliged with contracts and documents related to how the company decides on employee's salaries. I think there's a lot more resistance to bother with contracts and whatnot when they don't know if you're willing to work with them in principle or not.

As for "how stock options work", well, while it's probably nice on the side of employer to entertain such a question and while it's probably reasonable to give an answer along the lines of "erm, these are stock options of this and that type, these additional conditions apply, google please?", ending the job application process right there is probably overreacting.

I also feel it's important to note that 就業規則 is not really "a detailed contract", because it's not a contract, it's more of a "Labor rules" for the company, so it does count as an internal document and not for outsiders' eyes. Obviously, the rules must conform to the law and as someone has already noted they must be easily accessible to workers, which was always the case for me. In fact I have always received a hard copy of these on my first day.

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

#752
post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done this as well, though I only needed to once. They didn't even look at the contract I turned in. Just slapped it in a file and went on with things. Never came up again.

Don't both parties need to agree to (e.g initial) the redlined sections?

If you make the changes and they sign (or maybe even just signal acceptance), then I think they accepted them.

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

#753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most unions have anti-racism and anti-xenophobia in general as a central part of their organisation. Explicit rules exist in most, but many go further with resisting deportations, exposing discrimination in workplaces, solidarity strikes with workers in exploited countries, etc. I'd recommend you contact some local trade unionists, you'll find that they're overwhelmingly pro immigration and anti-racist. You'll also f…

It isn't about what it is today when life is good. It's about what it can become if life gets hard. If everyone agrees this is a good thing they'd all adopt the poison pill. After all, if the poison pill triggers, the organization is clearly acting against its principles and dissolution is better than continuation. The fact that they won't, and instead use toothless codes that can be repealed when things change make…

Life is hard right now and unionised workers all over the world are fighting to make it better.

How would such a "poison pill" even be enforced? If the majority decides something they can always do it, worst case by creating a new organisation which they then all join.

The US is very racist and such attitudes persist even in the labour movement. Historically, US reformist unions used to exclude non-citizens from membership, which is why the IWW started organising all workers including immigrants. The result of this democratic struggle is that US unions now organise all workers.

You're not losing anything by joining a union. It's possible that you may not gain as much as you'd like because of bigotry where you work, but that can also be fought against.

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

#754
post #738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And yet the unions are democratic, but the employers are not. You can vote out the union leadership and all important decisions require a ballot.

Power structures can be abused, but they can also be a way to concentrate the will of many to achieve something that cannot be done individually.

What's important is the material incentives of those involved. Even if they were to be insincere (in which case they often are removed), union leadership are incentivised to raise the wages of all members since dues are the main way they are funded. Employers are always incentivised to reduce wages as much as they can get away with, since they wish to maximise profits.

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

#755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know. I think what I said is a fair description. I boggles the mind how someone could think this is ethical, and can defend this.

What boggles the mind is how you can think that's a fair description. I stated to you that it wasn't malware, and you said "I know." How can it possibly be fair to paint something as malware if you "know" it wasn't? It's not even "like" malware - the whole point of the software was to inject notices that Google wanted its employees to see when they visited sites. That's the whole reason it exists! Calling it "basical…

So you are defending this as ethical and not something to obviously be fired for?

If yes, then there's nothing more to add.

The mechanism was there, but this person abused it. Deliberately.

But yes, it is fair. Given the technical ability to inject JS or text, this person went around checks, to do what they knew was absolutely not allowed nor what the system was designed for, abusing the system.

Who's to say next time there would not be JS reporting who goes where? Maybe there's a counter how many times this was shown?

What is they'd made a mistake? What if they'd broken browsing for the whole company?

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

#756
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…

>Want to go on vacation and still have my phone but not be bothered by company emails and calls. If you use a work profile on Android, you can disable it, eg at holidays or weekends. Not sure about the privacy.

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

#757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On Android, the work profile is supposed to solve that problem: you only add your corp account and install corp apps in work profile, and it's (at least supposed to be) isolated from your personal, default profile on your phone. This is even explicitly stated in work profile enabling flow. The spy activities described in the article is not about actual personal activities on the phone. One is looking at other's corp…

> the work profile is supposed to solve that problem: you only add your corp account and install corp apps in work profile Wait until your personal phone, with its work profile, comes into scope of a work-related deposition. You'll find just how paper thin that argument is.

Let's say I don't care about a deposition, but I am only scared of my company spying on my personal activity. Should I be worried if I use a work profile?

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

#758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they take my phone in court I'm not too concerned. I just don't want them to be able to sniff my personal profile info without me knowing.

> I just don't want them to be able to sniff my personal profile info without me knowing. They will, and you won't. (I've been there.)

Care to elaborate? Was this using work profiles?

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

#759
post #309
post #294

This headline is super confusing. I interpreted it as meaning Google spied on people and then fired them. However, what the article itself seems to be saying is that Google fired people for spying on others. The spying was, "for reviewing other employees’ calendars." The NLRB then found that illegal. At least, that's how I'm interpreting this article. Otherwise there's no actual explanation of what spying actually oc…

>Google violated US labor laws by spying on workers who were organizing employee protests, then firing two of them, according to a complaint to be filed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) today. This part of the article seems pretty clear. It also sounds like one of the fired employees did something involving looking at other people's calendars, but that the core reason that they were fired was for union-re…

[deleted]

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

#760

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 .

The thing is, from many sources I keep hearing that the suggested unchangability of terms and pay is just a negotiation tactic. They will come to you with printed documents, with policies that things totally cannot be changed, it's like that in the system, there is just no way. Then in many cases magically there are suddenly ways to change all those things after some more negotiation. You obviously need a strong position for this, good alternative offers etc, but you don't have to be Michael Jordan for the above story to happen.

A lot more things are open to negotiation than some people imagine. Even including buying a fridge at your local chain store or similar. Not every time, and not to everyone who merely says "I want".

Post reply on HN