Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers • Hacker News Board

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#61

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:05 PM UTC

ffggvv wrote: post #57

pembrook wrote: post #52

My question is, if it's so advantageous to employ people via onsite staffing firms (basically half of FAANG's workforce is employed this way), why doesn't Google stop directly employing people altogether? Without fail, if it's a giant publicly-traded company, a huge percentage of the workforce will always be onsite vendors. It seems so bizarrely arbitrary where they decide to hire direct vs. contract. And I'm not tal…

the engineers etc i’ve worked with that were contractors were far worse and way below normal google hiring bar. sorry if that’s not PC but it’s the truth. if they could get hired at actual google they would’ve done it. hell, if they could get hired as a SWE at a comparable firm they would do that instead of taking a massive pay cut to be a contractor

[deleted]

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#62

Post by sneak » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:09 PM UTC

This is not the first time Google has been known to do this. Eric Schmidt was personally involved in the criminal conspiracy that formed one of the other high profile cases, and enjoyed a long and prosperous career at Google for many years afterward.

Google is not an ethical employer.

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#63

Post by dekhn » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:09 PM UTC

It continues to impress me that Google says it hires smart people, trains them not to put incriminating evidence in emails (really), and then hires managers who then put an entire chain into email (probably also archived as a group) and get the company written up on the front page of the NY Times (the very criteria they try to scare you with).

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#64

Post by syshum » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:09 PM UTC

pembrook wrote: post #52

My question is, if it's so advantageous to employ people via onsite staffing firms (basically half of FAANG's workforce is employed this way), why doesn't Google stop directly employing people altogether? Without fail, if it's a giant publicly-traded company, a huge percentage of the workforce will always be onsite vendors. It seems so bizarrely arbitrary where they decide to hire direct vs. contract. And I'm not tal…

It is not only public companies, and the reasons are too numerous to list

A more recent trend it so they can claim to offer good benefits but in reality that is only for the select few actual employee's

Take for example the one company the claims to have a minimum wage of 70K (or what ever it was), I bet they are not paying the janitor, or other positions like that wage no they contracted those jobs out so now they can make the PR announcement they have this extremely high Min wage

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#65

Post by thanhhaimai » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:10 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #60

ffggvv wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the engineers etc i’ve worked with that were contractors were far worse and way below normal google hiring bar. sorry if that’s not PC but it’s the truth. if they could get hired at actual google they would’ve done it. hell, if they could get hired as a SWE at a comparable firm they would do that instead of taking a massive pay cut to be a contractor

That begs the question: why is Google using subpar developers? It's hard to imagine there just not being any better ones, and it probably isn't a money issue. Are they so against having good old employees?

Opinions are my own. I also make no claim on the expertise of contractors.

The common saying in engineering is you use the right tools for the job. Likewise, you place the right people to the right job. It would be a mismatch to put an L5+ to do some low impact work. That would be an inefficient use of limited resources. The SWE would also be unhappy since that affects their perf/promo. Depends on the potential impact/difficulty/urgency, it might be more appropriate to save that work for an intern, fixterm, or TVC.

It's not about "so against having good old employees". It's business.

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#66

Post by dekhn » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:10 PM UTC

Ansil849 wrote: post #6

willcipriano wrote: post #5

Sounds like they were caught red handed, mens rea and all. Any chance this ends up with serious repercussions like prison time?

> any chance this ends up with serious repercussions like prison time When has any staff member of a FAANG company faced prison time for a similar crime? Not a rhetorical question, I'm genuinely curious though my instinct is to say 'never'.

I was going to say that Italy convincted David Drummond in absentia but it turns out the sentence was suspended so he wouldn't actually have to go to jail.

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#67

Post by syshum » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:13 PM UTC

Ansil849 wrote: post #6

willcipriano wrote: post #5

Sounds like they were caught red handed, mens rea and all. Any chance this ends up with serious repercussions like prison time?

> any chance this ends up with serious repercussions like prison time When has any staff member of a FAANG company faced prison time for a similar crime? Not a rhetorical question, I'm genuinely curious though my instinct is to say 'never'.

Executives only go to jail if

1. They do something to harm the government (i.e Tax evasion)

2. They do something to harm a Rich person

3. They do something to harm another multinational corporation

If they just harm a few citizens... the government literally does not care

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#68

Post by arve0 » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:14 PM UTC

pembrook wrote: post #52

My question is, if it's so advantageous to employ people via onsite staffing firms (basically half of FAANG's workforce is employed this way), why doesn't Google stop directly employing people altogether? Without fail, if it's a giant publicly-traded company, a huge percentage of the workforce will always be onsite vendors. It seems so bizarrely arbitrary where they decide to hire direct vs. contract. And I'm not tal…

> My question is, if it's so advantageous to employ people via onsite staffing firms (basically half of FAANG's workforce is employed this way), why doesn't Google stop directly employing people altogether?

Because it’s the mix that is advantageous, not either one (employees only vs contractors only).

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#69

Post by epc » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:16 PM UTC

pembrook wrote: post #52

My question is, if it's so advantageous to employ people via onsite staffing firms (basically half of FAANG's workforce is employed this way), why doesn't Google stop directly employing people altogether? Without fail, if it's a giant publicly-traded company, a huge percentage of the workforce will always be onsite vendors. It seems so bizarrely arbitrary where they decide to hire direct vs. contract. And I'm not tal…

There’s a perverse distaste for hiring FTE for bland, routine work or to fill roles that have year to year volatility. Microsoft was notorious for this in the 1980s and early 1990s. If you were a superstar programmer you got offered a full time job as an employee. If you were “just” a technical writer you’d go through the same recruiting process but get offered a contract through a third party.

From 1994-1999 I ran ibm.com (whatever that meant). For most of the five years it was just me, one other FTE, and a roving band of 5-10 contractors. Any time I suggested converting the contractors to FTE I got slapped down, even though it eventually meant the loss of a lot of talent.

All I can figure is that the companies want to avoid long term benefits commitments. Healthcare. Pensions or 401ks, etc. They rarely saved money, the burden rate for my team was easily 30-50% more than my burden rate (not that the individuals got that largess, it usually went to their "manager" in the contracting agency).

Re: Google illegally underpaid thousands of workers

#70

Post by poopypoopington » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 10:17 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #60

ffggvv wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the engineers etc i’ve worked with that were contractors were far worse and way below normal google hiring bar. sorry if that’s not PC but it’s the truth. if they could get hired at actual google they would’ve done it. hell, if they could get hired as a SWE at a comparable firm they would do that instead of taking a massive pay cut to be a contractor

That begs the question: why is Google using subpar developers? It's hard to imagine there just not being any better ones, and it probably isn't a money issue. Are they so against having good old employees?

Just speculating (I work at a FAANG) – a lot of "software engineering" at these big tech companies is just centering divs and refactoring code – you don't need a 10xer to do that stuff.