Live data from Hacker News

I worked at Google for -10 days

andgein.ru

281–290 of 462 posts

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#281
post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At my company, there is no 2 weeks. The day you give your two weeks notice is your last day. We might pay you for those two weeks, depending on circumstances, but your building and network access is cut off within the hour. So, I personally would not give my notice until the day I actually want to be my last day.

That has never been the case at any company I have ever worked for. My impression is that two weeks notice with continued access is pretty standard so long as you're leaving on good terms.

his username is literally irrational... kinda makes sense

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never put in notice until background checks and all on boarding paperwork is 100% complete. Putting in notice on an offer letter is premature and, unfortunately, leads to bad results.

YUP! This happened to me and a good friend of mine who is an Eng Manager at Netflix now... But we both went through a three month long panel interview and I was told I did "very well" on all my interviews and to expect an offer letter in the morning. The next day they called and told me that they wouldnt be making me an offer. The issue was that Brin was still the final sign off... The school that i went to in the ea…

A couple of things there.

1. A Verbal Contract Isn’t Worth the Paper It’s Written On -- attributed to Samuel Goldwyn, the G of MGM. I don't agree with all the advice to work 2 jobs simultaneously but definitely wait for a written offer. No sensible HR person is going to have an issue with that.

2. In the case of acquisitions/mergers/etc. make it crystal clear that you're not trying to claim a school/employer with maybe more cachet/recognition but where you actually went to/worked at is part of someone else now (or defunct) so if they want to confirm past attendance/employment that's where they need to go.

I'm not going to say I worked for Dell even though a string of 2 past employers are "Dell" now via a string of acquisitions. (I might say, these employers, now part of Dell Technologies though the companies are well enough known that I could probably skip the Dell reference which is irrelevant other than they'll pay me a pension someday.)

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every single job I have had since my first have been working with people I worked with before. If you burn all your bridges every time you change jobs, you are going to have a bad time.

I've been in this industry for 25 years, never once have I ever felt the need to go back to a previous job. Can we please stop parroting this notion that we have to bend the knee to companies who would drop us without questioning?

I am not saying going back to the same job, I am saying working with the same people at a new job. All of my former bosses have tried to recruit me to any new company they move to, and that is partly because I am always professional if I leave a company.

I have zero loyalty to a company, but I have loyalty to my coworkers.

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

0 day notice and no severance is unusual, at least for skilled professional jobs in the US. It does happen, but usually only for some unusual circumstance, like some kind of employee misbehavior or a sudden financial calamity for the company. Two weeks notice by the employee or severance by the employer is the most common case on both sides, probably for roughly 80% or so of professional jobs including all of my own.…

Anecdotally, I have never heard of a US company giving two weeks notice for a termination of any kind. The vast majority of terminations I've seen are immediate, but I've also seen companies give termination dates in the (relatively) far future to employees (generally a couple months, but I've seen 1-2 years). Severance is also only common in large organizations. I've seen few small startups or bootstrapped companies…

I've seen it once in 25 years. Management told an engineer that she would be layed off/terminated "when she is done with the project she is working on". She milked the project for almost four months and then quit on her own after finding a new job. Turns out she did almost zero work during those four months. Can't say I blame her.

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never worked for a company that does the background checks, drug screens, etc on your start date, Typical process that I have had both as employee and a manager is 1. Offer Letter 2. Offer Accepted 3. Pre-Employment Activities start. Start Date is set 2 weeks out 4. Pre-Employment Activities Completed 1 Week out 5. New Employee Starts. It would/should not be an issue for an incoming employee to request a start…

I don't think it's that uncommon. I have personally worked at two companies that didn't do the background check until after employment (which I would never do again), and I've heard this anecdote a few times from others.

hmm I know for some position there has been a high first day no show rate, I wonder if that is what drives that position? Background checks while not super expensive are not cheap either and if you have a high number of people noping out before the first day I could see where they would want to mitigate those costs.

With the changes in drug laws, and this I have seen some companies starting to forgo pre-employment drug screens, which IMO is a good thing.

I am not sure what value most of these Pre-Employment checks provide anyway really.

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#286

There’s no great solution to this apart from the economy and company doing well so that this doesnt happen. I’ll lay out the reasons below: 1. Let’s say we pass a law that prevents offers from being revoked. This will make hiring much harder and increase 5 rounds to like 10 and involve many more committees and even then most candidates other than sureshots getting rejected. 2. Ban revoking offers only for overseas em…

Google is profitable. They are not losing money, and they are in no danger of becoming unprofitable because of payroll. If we lived in world where folks measured things in a normal light, Google would not have frozen hiring, rescinded offers, and laid-off thousands. We live in the upside down world. We have to stop accepting the crazy, upside-down values of the modern world. The world would be better if Google just w…

eh... Google, more than your average publicly traded company, does rely on external investment by way of the stock in order to conduct its operations. In particular, a very large percent of compensation, especially for the most valued employees, is equity-based.

Google's revenues were flat last year but costs were up. Hence, profits were down. The C-suite's insight into the future seems to be that future revenues are not going to make up for the current cost structure. The stock price is roughly correlated with profits (let's ignore NVDA for a moment). So to keep the stock price afloat, profits must be propped up. If the stock price drops, all employees are suddenly paid less, especially the ones you value most. So not doing layoffs is equivalent to giving everyone a pay cut. Pay cuts are even worse for morale and long-term company performance than layoffs. The choice seems clear to me.

On top of that, when you're a publicly traded company, your obligation to your shareholders is at least as great as your obligation to employees. If you don't like that agreement, don't go public (as a worker, don't agree to work for a for-profit company). Google is a for-profit, not a cooperative.

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been in this industry for 25 years, never once have I ever felt the need to go back to a previous job. Can we please stop parroting this notion that we have to bend the knee to companies who would drop us without questioning?

I am not saying going back to the same job, I am saying working with the same people at a new job. All of my former bosses have tried to recruit me to any new company they move to, and that is partly because I am always professional if I leave a company. I have zero loyalty to a company, but I have loyalty to my coworkers.

Not giving a 2 week notice is not unprofessional. And if you don't get recruited/"a good recommendation" from them for it, chances are that bridge burning was worthwhile.

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK you don't get the typical employment rights until after 2 years of employment. Most employment contracts have you on zero-notice until 6 month probation is completed.

> Most employment contracts have you on zero-notice until 6 month probation is completed. No? I've never been on zero months notice. A reduced notice period for probation yes, but never on no notice.

Always one week notice during probation in my experience.

But the point remains that the company can terminate you with very little cause and very little notice when you've just started. So while it is a good idea to wait until at least receiving a signed contract before giving notice to your current job you'll still be at higher risk for some time.

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you give -10 days notice. 2 weeks is a nicety and not legally required in the USA. Probably not required in many other places as well. It's unfortunate but I've never had a manager get too upset about it.

At my company, there is no 2 weeks. The day you give your two weeks notice is your last day. We might pay you for those two weeks, depending on circumstances, but your building and network access is cut off within the hour. So, I personally would not give my notice until the day I actually want to be my last day.

I worked at one company that was like that, but it was a result of the CEO being pretty awkward about people leaving the company, something he wasn't used to until huge growth hit. That's a red flag IMO.

Re: I worked at Google for -10 days

#290
post #17

I've heard several stories about companies rescinding offers in a timeframe where it's obvious the candidate would have already made irreversible decisions. Funny thing is that the same HR people will tell their own stories about candidates backing out with huge eyerolls, distain, etc. I suppose the more common it becomes, the less the "offer" process will mean in practice. Candidates will hedge their bets. Edit: If…

Rescinding offers will mean employees won't give 2 weeks notice due to risk of offer being rescinded. Google and other companies who rescind offers are screwing over everyone by doing this.
Post reply on HN