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

131–140 of 199 posts

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#131

Post by hotpotamus »

gruez wrote: post #36
danpalmer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been several layers to the criticism. The first is roughly why does a company with many billions in the bank need to lay off anyone. However, assuming that layoffs do need to happen, there has been a lot more criticism of how they were conducted. In the UK there is, in summary, a right to a fair process – where _roles_ are eliminated, not _people_. That when there aren't enough roles for the people left, t…

>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 agree, and it's worth remembering next time conservatives start calling oligarchs "job creators" or whatever slavish euphemism they come up with next.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#132

Post by robswc »

fsniper wrote: post #127
robswc wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it wouldn't be on par with FAANG but it would still be 3-4x higher. An "IT Specialist" at the US Treasury gets paid between $150-180k. https://www.usajobs.gov/job/716266700

I am not against at all for more wages, and I don't think any UK worker is too. But if less regulation and lower cost of business comes with this kind of news, thank you but no thank you. https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/31/health/ohio-train-derailment-...

What news?

It says the workers studying fell ill but recovered within the same day.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#133

Post by gruez »

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).

>From the point-of-view of the UK government, employing people and paying taxes are important roles companies like Google need to play.

That's only true in the vaguest sense, and not something that's inscribed in law. According to a link someone else shared[1], the only real requirement is for google to do a "consultation". There's no requirement or duty to keep people employed.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/redundancy-your-rights/consultation

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#134

Post by ilikehurdles »

bb123 wrote: post #116
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…

> 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.

The 5 extra PTO days are not worth halving my salary and then almost halving it again. I may move (back) to Europe when I retire or come close to that age.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#135

Post by newswasboring »

voidfunc wrote: post #65
newswasboring wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

It doesn't matter what you accept of reject. The owners set the priorities not the workers or the general public.

Why are you in the comments if you don't even want to discuss anything? Me accepting and rejecting is in the context of an HN thread where people like to discuss things.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#136

Post by newswasboring »

Quarrel wrote: post #115
newswasboring wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 la…

> While layoffs are tough for everyone

That's the thing though, its not tough for everyone. Its only tough for the employee, the employer gets more money. Its not tough for them at all.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#138

Post by robswc »

fsniper wrote: post #125
robswc wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

Still? how is that at all applies to workers? Workers should be caring more of how the business is regulated instead of their own rights/conditions? That does not make sense to me at all. Here Google is a behemoth having thousands of employees and most probably unlimited cash flow all across the world and you are suggesting a few hundred UK workers should be more concerned about this behemoth's responsibilities than…

>Still? how is that at all applies to workers? Workers should be caring more of how the business is regulated instead of their own rights/conditions? That does not make sense to me at all.

You can care about whatever you want. Introducing regulation and hoops to jump through for businesses comes with a cost though.

>are suggesting a few hundred UK workers should be more concerned about this behemoth's responsibilities than their own benefits?

It goes beyond Google. I'm saying Europe should be concerned that a lot of their top talent leaves to start businesses or work in other countries.

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#139

Post by nequo »

fathyb wrote: post #45
nequo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it loses value at a pace like nothing else you own. It’s a wealth sink.

A lot of modern sport cars are currently going up in value because new cars are either unavailable in the short term or not satisfying enough to the car enthusiast crowd.

What are some examples that you know of?

Re: Google workers in London stage walkout over job cuts

#140

Post by gruez »

bb123 wrote: post #116
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…

> 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.

>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

So best case scenario, you get 20 days more paid leave than in the US (which typically only has 2 weeks or 10 days). That works out to approximately 7.7% higher effective wage.

Post reply on HN