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

Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 199 posts

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#111

Post by VikingCoder »

charlieyu1 wrote: post #81
VikingCoder wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what else leads to the most talented people to leave? When the company stops listening to the employees.

Keeping deadweights leads to most talented people leaving.

Yeah, there should be a process where people are evaluated by their peers to measure their performance and impact. The input from people who have demonstrated high impact should weigh more heavily.

Oh wait, Google already has that. If that's not working well, that's its own problem. These layoffs were somewhat indiscriminate, with high-performing people getting fired.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#112

Post by cmiles74 »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #96
cmiles74 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I cancel a subscription to Disney+, no one loses their job. I think that's an important distinction.

It's completely irrelevant. And, yes, reducing you spending does lead to job losses.

I strongly disagree; my reduction in spending doesn't lead to job losses at any particular company. Perhaps if said company is providing such little service that many people choose to reduce their spending by all spending less on the same company, job losses would result.

In this case we're talking about a lot of people at a pretty far remove from the employees being laid off. This is very different from what is happening at Google UK. So much so that I don't believe the comparison is at all useful.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#113

Post by fsniper »

theGnuMe wrote: post #110
robswc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

B/c the cold hard truth is that people would rather the 3-4x salaries. https://jobs.theguardian.com/job/8512191/head-of-cyber-secur... You have the head of cyber security making almost 1/2 as much as many CS grads right out of college. People can and will say they want more rights... but if that were _really_ true you would see tons of tech workers breaking down the door to get into Europe. As it stands, the complete…

Yes but that role you link to will open up a lot of doors, revolving doors as they say. Also does the UK have paid speaking engagements like the US does?

And that's a government role. I don't know what a US government head of security role pays, but I suppose it would not be on par with a FAANG role?

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#114

Post by luckylion »

cmiles74 wrote: post #69
gruez wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The first is roughly why does a company with many billions in the bank need to lay off anyone. because it's a for-profit company, not a jobs program.

I'm not sure the distinction here is all that useful. From the point-of-view of the UK government, employing people and paying taxes are important roles companies like Google need to play. It seems to me that the rules around redundancy have been put in place to discourage just the sort of layoffs Google is trying to put in place (i.e., lay off N% of everyone).

Google employees could have volunteered to share their outsized salaries with their laid-off colleagues.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#115

Post by Quarrel »

newswasboring wrote: post #49
version_five wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The first is roughly why does a company with many billions in the bank need to lay off anyone. This shows an utter misunderstanding of how businesses or finances of any kind work and would completely discredit anyone who tried to use it as an argument.

Can you elaborate on your statement for dummies? (Only if your argument isn't companies exist only to maximize profit, that one I understand and reject).

Even if they are entirely employee owned, having thousands of staff working towards goals that you're no longer trying to meet or are unproductive is a bad idea. You need to employ & deploy your people in a productive capacity (however that is defined, it could be pure research, not profit motivated).

Big tech expanded a LOT during the pandemic. Too much.

Google hired 30,300 people in 2022! (and 21k in 2021)

While layoffs are tough for everyone (especially those losing the job), if you expanded too fast, I think that an early reset is probably better than burning through more cash to deal with a bigger problem later, when you then might have to make deeper employee cuts than if you'd acted sooner.

After these layoffs Google will still be a LOT bigger than it was a year ago.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#116

Post by bb123 »

robswc wrote: post #99
fsniper wrote: post #78

It's strange to see US based workers to bash on Europe based workers who push back for their rights. Even if you don't see any "rights" to fight back, isn't it to your own benefit that someone else is fighting for more rights/better conditions? Why would you sit back and accept to be the scapegoat for conditions that you didn't cause or you didn't have any say over at the first place? The companies are laying of peop…

B/c the cold hard truth is that people would rather the 3-4x salaries. https://jobs.theguardian.com/job/8512191/head-of-cyber-secur... You have the head of cyber security making almost 1/2 as much as many CS grads right out of college. People can and will say they want more rights... but if that were _really_ true you would see tons of tech workers breaking down the door to get into Europe. As it stands, the complete…

> The cold hard truth is that people would rather the 3-4x salaries.

This sounds like an assumption based firmly in the American value system. This part is often missed:

> 25 days annual leave (rising to 30 after 5 years), plus 8 public holidays and the King’s birthday

Anyway comparing a government job to big tech isn't fair. It is big tech salaries that are unusual, not the other way around.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#117

Post by cmiles74 »

luckylion wrote: post #114
cmiles74 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure the distinction here is all that useful. From the point-of-view of the UK government, employing people and paying taxes are important roles companies like Google need to play. It seems to me that the rules around redundancy have been put in place to discourage just the sort of layoffs Google is trying to put in place (i.e., lay off N% of everyone).

Google employees could have volunteered to share their outsized salaries with their laid-off colleagues.

Is that really true? I believe that this is exactly the sort of negotiation in which Google UK decided they wouldn't participate.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#118

Post by robswc »

fsniper wrote: post #109
robswc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

B/c the cold hard truth is that people would rather the 3-4x salaries. https://jobs.theguardian.com/job/8512191/head-of-cyber-secur... You have the head of cyber security making almost 1/2 as much as many CS grads right out of college. People can and will say they want more rights... but if that were _really_ true you would see tons of tech workers breaking down the door to get into Europe. As it stands, the complete…

How is that at all related? US paying more is not mutually exclusive to people in Europe to fight for better conditions/their rights? Do you consider this to cause US to pay less and in turn lost income? Sorry to break it to you, but it's already happening and not at all related to what happens in Europe, but to US's own incompetency on responsible economics.

>How is that at all related?

It is all related. It is so much harder to do business in Europe than in the US, especially in tech. Almost exclusively due to regulation.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#119

Post by ExoticPearTree »

throwaw12 wrote: post #57
nonethewiser wrote: post #12

These people seem out of touch. > "It has been difficult for those involved. We have a redundancy process for a reason, so that employees can make their voice heard," they said. "But it feels as if our concerns have fallen on deaf ears." They’re doing layoffs. In what scenario does negative feedback from employees change the minds of management? “Oh shit we didn’t know this negatively impacted you all. My bad.”

> These people seem out of touch. Why? This is basic capitalism, every party cares about their interests. On one side you have companies laying off people to increase profits (some of them have billions in their account), on the other side people walking out to prevent future scenarios for their own interest > In what scenario does negative feedback from employees change the minds of management? “Oh shit we didn’t kn…

> Imagine a scenario where everyone walks out from that company, would it change the mind of management?

In no scenario this will happen. People have competing interests, and very few actually care what happens job-wise to his/her colleague.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#120

Post by luckylion »

cmiles74 wrote: post #112
mytailorisrich wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's completely irrelevant. And, yes, reducing you spending does lead to job losses.

I strongly disagree; my reduction in spending doesn't lead to job losses at any particular company. Perhaps if said company is providing such little service that many people choose to reduce their spending by all spending less on the same company, job losses would result. In this case we're talking about a lot of people at a pretty far remove from the employees being laid off. This is very different from what is happ…

> I strongly disagree; my reduction in spending doesn't lead to job losses at any particular company.

It'll lead to fractional joblosses based on the amount you reduce your spending. Are you upset because Google is bigger than you and if you and they do the same relative actions, their absolute numbers will be much bigger?

If you dump your trash in the park, it'll be barely noticeable. If Google does it, it's no longer a park. Yes, but it's still the same thing, you're just a lot smaller than Google.

Post reply on HN