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

How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

whenrulesdontapply.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 289 posts

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#211

Post by ChuckMcM »

joshuamorton wrote: post #204
ChuckMcM wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I was generally draw the line at the same point, although I expect Director is in there too. Much of the director and above remuneration is in stock and bonuses which benefits disproportionately from profit.

From what I've seen, director level compensation follows mostly the same structure as non-director compensation, but with the dials turned up in much the same way. That is to say, L5 -> L6, L6 -> L7, and L7 -> L8/Director modify your compensation structure in similar ways. This ignores things like truly discretionary cash bonuses and one-time stock grants which exist, but I'd have no visibility into.

> This ignores things like truly discretionary cash bonuses and one-time stock grants which exist, but I'd have no visibility into.

Having played at that level my experience was that generally they start at 100% of your 'base' salary and go up from there. Much of the knobs are intentionally opaque.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#212

Post by flukus »

nostrademons wrote: post #122

So I was at one of these companies when the scandal broke. I didn't get screwed quite so much as my coworkers, since I'd only been working there for a year or so. The settlement was a joke - I got about $1100, but my compensation increased by roughly $100K/year the year after the cartel broke, and kept rising. Can't say I'm terribly pleased about either the wage-fixing or the settlement, but... My wife works in phila…

> We were talking the other day about how the Bay Area's housing/homelessness crisis is a direct consequence of the collapse of the high-tech wage-fixing cartel.

Inflated housing costs are a worldwide phenomenon, you'll see a very similar story in Sydney, London, Tokyo and other places so I very much doubt the root cause is anything to do with the bay area. It might be worse there given the amount of money flowing in, but it's a much bigger problem.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#213

Post by maxdamantus »

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #164
munk-a wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, there is far too much ability to transfer liability in the modern world which lets this sort of stuff get abstract and easier to dismiss. Companies should be held accountable to the extent their growth has encouraged bad behavior, but individuals at that company committed the behavior and, if they were instructed to do so and blindly followed then... 1. "Just following orders" isn't now and has never been a…

In a frictionless system, sure. When lawyers cost so much, this kind of chain-of-lawsuits system would be a huge payout to lawyers.

If that's the criticism, it should presumably apply much more widely than just this case—why not all of civil law?

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#214

Post by thatoneuser »

deogeo wrote: post #84
jammygit wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transfer of liability? There are candid emails between Steve jobs and Schmidt about the topic. Edit: They made a minor settlement and there was a lawsuit that got a tiny amount of press. http://time.com/42322/steve-jobs-chilling-response-after-get... Edit 2: there was not even a slap on the wrist legally speaking: "The proposed settlement, which if accepted by the court will be in effect for five years, prohibits the…

...am I understanding it correctly that their 'punishment' was having to promise not to break the law again? But only for five years??

"Don't be evil"

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#215

Post by basetop »

inlined wrote: post #4

One of the things that made my mind explode was that this was blatantly recommended in The Hard Thing About Hard Things. Horowitz argues that your relationship with your business partner is worth more than the employee and you shouldn’t entertain solicitations for employment.

Sadly, employees are just another resource ( human resource ) in the modern world.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#216

Post by sneak »

turc1656 wrote: post #11

Notice the difference: " Top executives of leading tech companies secretly agreed among themselves not to hire each other’s employees" "...brought charges against the companies " They should have been indicting both, or just the executives for their explicit role in this criminal behavior. I really detest the lack of individual accountability in all these cases when we deal with large companies. If this was a couple…

Google’s shareholders and board kept Eric Schmidt in a position of power for approximately a decade after his fraud against the staff was revealed.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#217

Post by scottlegrand2 »

I think the latest expression of this concept came out when a friend of mine was up for a senior role at Google and they ended consideration when they suddenly decided that he switched jobs too often to be a leader, but they were happy to continue considering him for a role beneath what he currently already had.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#218

Post by thatoneuser »

skybrian wrote: post #202
tbarbugli wrote: post #136

> estimated $3 billion in lost wages. Before the case went to trial, the companies settled for a total of $435 million So you get busted doing something illegal and walk away with a 2.5Billion in your pocket and 0 jail time. How do you expect execs to not do this all the time?

We are talking about a hypothetical wage calculation with many unknowns versus a cash settlement. In truth, nobody knows what would have happened in the counterfactual case, but settlements require picking a number.

The number ought to err too high, not too low. This is supposed to be punishment and deterrent, not a gamble to get ahead illegally.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#219

Post by gok »

arebop wrote: post #123
gok wrote: post #89

> Top executives of leading tech companies secretly agreed among themselves not to hire each other’s employees That's not accurate. The agreement was about recruiters cold-calling each other's employees. Employees were free to reach out on their own between companies. Workers routinely switched companies while the agreement was in effect. I still think it was bullshit, but it wasn't quite as egregious as the article…

Your statement is also not accurate, because there were several variants of "the agreement" and for some pairs of companies the agreement extended beyond cold-calling [ https://www.lieffcabraser.com/antitrust/high-tech-employees/ ]. I'm sure multiple careers were set back when their prospective employer's HR department notified their current employer's HR department about the disloyalty.

Those allegations didn't have very strong evidence. They were repeated by some lawyers looking for people to opt out of the class action. When I asked for details they didn't have anything.

Re: How Apple, Google, and other tech companies conspired against their own workers

#220

Post by josho »

JDulin wrote: post #194
turc1656 wrote: post #11

Notice the difference: " Top executives of leading tech companies secretly agreed among themselves not to hire each other’s employees" "...brought charges against the companies " They should have been indicting both, or just the executives for their explicit role in this criminal behavior. I really detest the lack of individual accountability in all these cases when we deal with large companies. If this was a couple…

This is an important point, and I couldn't agree more. This idea overwhelms me when I read the newest filings and indictments of pharmaceutical companies in the opioid crisis. A corporation, fundamentally, cannot "learn lessons" like people do. It is a collection of incentives, with men inside directed or manipulated by those incentives. If gently nudging 47,000 people a year to kill themselves with overdoses would c…

While I agree, in our current political climate it’s not going to happen.

In the interim I would be willing to settle on significant punitive damages. Eg. Make getting caught very expensive and those corporate nudges will start nudging in the directions of protecting employees, consumers, etc.

Post reply on HN