[deleted]
I worked at Google for -10 days
331–340 of 462 posts
Re: I worked at Google for -10 days
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
On a general level sure maybe, but for this particular case, there was little economical need for Google to have any layoffs. They're swimming in money and are highly profitable. Pulling the rug out underneath a new employee who is days away from starting and moving his whole life to a new country is simply shitty behaviour.
> there was little economical need for Google to have any layoffs The trouble is, public companies like Google aren't owned by their execs anymore. They've lost control to a bunch of idiots on Wall Street. They optimize for stock price, not employee satisfaction, not customer satisfaction.
> They optimize for stock price,
Of course, understanding the reality of this situation and acting accordingly would be good for stock price.
What you're talking about is optimizing for short term stock prices or the perception of what's good for them.
Re: I worked at Google for -10 days
#333Having an offer rescinded for 'business reasons' is unbelievably annoying, and the author has my sympathy. That said, it's kind of understandable too. Things happen. The landscape changes. Some people will be affected. You kind of have to roll with it sometimes. I wish the author the best of luck finding something else quickly. What I find truly incredible though is that it took a full year to go from application to…
I'm always astonished at the incredibly slow, inefficient, and bureaucratic hiring processes of what are held to be the most capable companies in the world. I imagine it's also incredibly expensive and -from what I've read- doesn't seem cut down on the cases of false positives it's supposedly there to prevent. I wonder why these companies don't try and emulate something like what a military does: take in the willing…
> take in the willing and motivated
how do you select the willing and motivated among the millions of resumes you receive?
Re: I worked at Google for -10 days
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's all correct, though they do pay good money. Otherwise it's just a large, messy organisation where blame deflection is everyone's basic survival strategy. This is for example why he got such cryptic messages all the way through, nobody wanted to tell him that things are actually shit and unlikely to result in an employment before their boss' boss' boss announces that this is the case.
> though they do pay good money. When my wife was looking for a VP level position at a tech company last year, Google's interview process was by far the most cumbersome and their offer was the lowest she got by a sizeable amount. When she mentioned this to them, they said she could begin the process all over again to see if she could maybe get more. She thanked them for their time and then accepted one of the reasona…
I cannot actually believe this. Can you share actual numbers?
Google pays well above most Fortune 50 companies at the VP level. Definitely over a few million per year.
I can think of a handful of companies that pay more, unless I’m totally mistaken.
Re: I worked at Google for -10 days
#335Right before the dotcom bust, Alcatel had the Go USA program, where European employees could apply for US jobs. I applied and was in the process of relocating as well, but ultimately joined a different US company.
The program was abruptly cancelled when the economy went south. There were stories about families who sold their house and everything, and discovered at the airport that their tickets has been cancelled.
Re: I worked at Google for -10 days
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
In many places the notice period is enforceable, with a standard period of three to six months for senior positions.
What places?
Varies by province in Canada but generally there is a fixed amount of time you need to be at the company before they can just kick you out. For example in Alberta if you've been with an employer longer than 2 years you must give them 2 weeks. They can terminate you immediately after you resign, but they own you 2 weeks of pay.
Likewise, if the company lays you off, they have to give you up to 8-weeks notice depending on how many years you were with the company; 10+ years warrants the full 8-weeks, while 2-4 years in service gets you 2-weeks. These are also mandatory minimums; some companies or employees with contracts or collective agreements may get / offer more.
Plenty of loopholes there, like for "just cause", and some industries are "exempted by custom" or by law, like construction or forestry.
Re: I worked at Google for -10 days
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is far more sensible advice than all the "there ought to be a law" (in which jurisdiction?) comments on this thread and probably also more realistic than trying to figure out how to protect yourself 100% against any eventuality. Even without moving internationally, managers change, executives decide to cancel projects or cut back headcount, etc. Sure, that can happen a year down the road too. But if something is…
I mean, the advice is "use a giant pile of money to set up and maintain a dual-home situation until you are satisfied that the job will pan out." Laws are supposed to protect people who don't have the resources to proactively hedge against stuff like this.
A situation can "not pan out" in lots of ways that laws can't/won't protect against. Pretty much no law is going to handle "This job/place isn't like I thought it was going to be and I want to pull the plug before we have to commit" absent gross misrepresentation and probably getting lawyers involved. The parent specifically used the phrase "once she felt good about the position."
Maybe you cross your fingers and hope for the best or you use resources you have to hedge things. (Where hedging implies spending some upside to guard against serious downside.)
Re: I worked at Google for -10 days
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>Also jobs often/usually fire people with 0 day notice and no severance. That is not typical nor the norm. Most companies have established PiP policies, and severance even in the cases of "for cause" terminations (though that is rarer) "Fire with 0 day notice and no severance" is more likely to be found at startups, and/or small owner led companies with no real policies, or HR Depts.
Don't know what the law is like in most states in the US but in the EU if the employee has been with the company for longer than 6 months it wouldn't even be legal to fire with 0 notice & no severance - generally companies wants you out asap but continue paying your salary for the minimums require by law. In my experience at least 2 weeks and more commonly 1+ months (I've seen people get 3 months, that have worked at…
I think it goes without saying that the EU is different.
Here in Germany, in fact things are problematic in the other direction. For the last 2 hires I made, their previous company forced them to work through their 3 month notice period.
Re: I worked at Google for -10 days
#339Earlier 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.
In previous jobs I’ve always given notice after receiving an offer. In hindsight, I realize that was pretty dumb, but it was a different time, long ago. Going forward I will absolutely wait until my first day on the new job to give notice to the old one. It’s not fair to either employer, but getting an offer pulled after quitting an existing job scares the hell out of me.
I think they mean when you get completed background check and a signed offer. Though if you're wfh you might as well try to keep the old job for as long as you can keep getting paid...
Re: I worked at Google for -10 days
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
After 15+ years on the industry and being on all sides of the table (hiring, firing, being hired, being fired, interviewing, prospecting candidates, etc...) I haven't found a situation where HR makes things better . What's the point of HR? Can't we do without them? Really. Edit: This tweet[0] which is pretty much a rant in disguise has a point. What if AI has a much better success rate on this? Recruiters are clueles…
Oh God, please no. Not enough getting tons of recruiter spam, now I'd also get robots pestering me about considering an exciting opportunity in a new exciting startup about which they'd surely be glad to tell me if only I respond to their spam. And this would happen anytime I'd write something online that is tangentially related to some keyword they gave to the robot. Because if I asked a question about some Scala li…
You basically laid out what an HR-minded person would do with an AI (I want a faster horse), and yes it sucks.
Try to think of how the hiring could be improved in such way that HR becomes unnecessary. "One-click-apply" to any job you want, AI vets you in seconds and tells you yes/no/feedback. Many other good possibilities.
>"sorry, our AI hiring system had a bug, we deployed an update. We apologize for the inconvenience
LOL, are you trying to make a point for humans here? Ghosting candidates is the standard nowadays. In the example you make the candidate gets a response, at least.