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

Google employees who work from home could lose money

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 699 posts

Re: Google employees who work from home could lose money

#91

Post by unmole »

kristopolous wrote: post #57
nostrebored wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because employees in the office are more productive.

The planet is actually on fire, right now, as you read this. So fuck productivity. We can manage. We must sacrifice the inconvenience of wasting our time commuting because of some arbitrary productivity definition to stop the surface of the planet from being engulfed in flames. There's also a pandemic that's killed 4.3 million people because productivity is apparently more important than containing the outbreak of a…

> The planet is actually on fire, right now, as you read this.

This really isn't different from the person who brought a snowball into the US Senate.

> There's also a pandemic that's killed 4.3 million

Google requires employees working from the office to be vaccinated.

Re: Google employees who work from home could lose money

#92

Post by nonameiguess »

nostrebored wrote: post #31
kristopolous wrote: post #23

It's weird how directly the incentive is to increase your carbon footprint. They'll essentially pay you more for contributing to congestion and pollution.

Because employees in the office are more productive.

That's not what they're doing at all. The pay is based on location, not whether you're in an office or not. Work out of an office in a lower cost-of-living region and you still earn less than someone working from home in a higher cost-of-living region.

Re: Google employees who work from home could lose money

#93

Post by Jach »

rjzzleep wrote: post #34
underseacables wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or massages, child care, game rooms, or any of the other ridiculous perks. The company could start rolling those back if enough people wfh.

The reason why they have it all there is specifically to abuse your work hours. Hungry, don't have any food? Go back to the office real quick to grab a snack on a Sunday. And well you might have just figured out something so you might end up back at your desk. There are enough studies on why those campuses are designed that way. The convenience is designed at making sure you spend more time at work.

That's one reason, not the reason. However it's interesting to note that the convenience factor aimed at getting people to do "just a little more" is even more greatly amplified by just enabling WFH. Indeed a lot of companies noticed that people were working way more after WFH than beforehand, but after a while they had to start messaging against it because that burns people out. Unfortunately the concept of "work-life balance" was selected to increase focus on, but it seems to be better than nothing.

Re: Google employees who work from home could lose money

#94

Post by pc86 »

paulcole wrote: post #64
helsinkiandrew wrote: post #56

> One Google employee ..would likely see their pay cut by about 10% by working from home full-time > The employee was considering remote work but decided to keep going to the office - despite the two-hour commute. 10% paycut in place of 10 hours of commute seems a good deal to me.

Unless you need that 10% of your salary.

I think it's unlikely that Google SDEs are living paycheck to paycheck.

Re: Google employees who work from home could lose money

#95

Post by pc86 »

whydid wrote: post #90
lultimouomo wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you could have your company pay you all the money they have (but still magically continue to function), wouldn't you?

This is a ridiculous argument. How could a company continue to function in this case? A pot of gold or some other form of magic? The point is, compensation is inequitable. Upper management at most tech companies is paid 20-50x what a worker is paid. Do you think that is reasonable?

Of course compensation is inequitable. I don't think anyone outside fringe leftist politicos have ever suggested it should be otherwise?

And if your company continues to print money decade after decade while paying upper management 20-50x what a worker makes, maybe that's not the worst thing in the world.

Re: Google employees who work from home could lose money

#96

Post by gravypod »

Panini_Jones wrote: post #84
chrisseaton wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Googlers had any collective bargaining power, they wouldn't be getting salary reductions: they would be getting extra expense money for desks, chairs, and ISP upgrades. Since Google already pays the most, where do you threaten to leave to while bargaining?

Google does not already pay the most. In recent years, they've been known to even 'lowball' SWE candidates with no leverage. Source: https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Google,Facebook,Microsoft&tr...

Anacdata: My personal comp is on the lower half of the spectrum for my level. Took a small pay cut from the startup I came from.

Left for Google because I was tired of proposing changes, having someone else in the org disagree, and then having someone high up say "I talked to my friend at Google and he likes my way better so it's better than yours". Now I'm going to be the Googler and never have to worry about that again.

Re: Google employees who work from home could lose money

#97

Post by thegginthesky »

pc86 wrote: post #87
thegginthesky wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is arguably false. Anecdotally, I have small children at home and worked from home even before the pandemic when my company had an office. I have climbed the corporate leader every evaluation period because of my performance, while coworkers who were exclusively in the office weren't so fortunate. It just goes to show that people are very different and it's impossible to generalize statements based on a single v…

Are productivity and successfully playing office politics to get a promotion related?

I never had to play office politics, because the opportunities for doing so while doing remote work is close to none.

I guess I have the habit of keeping my work documented which helps when I'm asked for proof of anything. But at the same time people can see how much work I do at any time too.

Re: Google employees who work from home could lose money

#98

Post by lultimouomo »

whydid wrote: post #90
lultimouomo wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you could have your company pay you all the money they have (but still magically continue to function), wouldn't you?

This is a ridiculous argument. How could a company continue to function in this case? A pot of gold or some other form of magic? The point is, compensation is inequitable. Upper management at most tech companies is paid 20-50x what a worker is paid. Do you think that is reasonable?

Of course it is a ridiculous argument. Same as GP. How would you live and be able to work for your company if it didn't pay you at all?

The fact is that the employer/employee relation is a business one, in which each party looks for his own interest first and foremost. The interest of the other party is only instrumental.

There are power asymmetries, and we can agree that the average guy gets, on average, shafted, while someone born "on the right side of the table" is always dealt the good cards[0].

But I don't think the nature of the employer/employee relation is the problem. The problem is the vast inequality of opportunity at birth.

[0] Though I shall note that in a sense pretty much everyone on this website is born on the right side of the table, and doesn't seem to feel too guilty about that.

Re: Google employees who work from home could lose money

#100

Post by diogofranco »

rexreed wrote: post #71

Does this mean employee agreements are up for renegotiating? Salary / compensation for work is the key element to an employee agreement. If employers can change compensation at will without employee consent then the employee agreement is truly meaningless and simply a tool for the employer to wield against the employee. I'd imagine a few employee lawsuits on breach of contract that will test that.

Location is in the contract, you sign a new offer in order to move
Post reply on HN