Workers Leaving the Googleplex • Hacker News Board

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#341

Post by dataminer » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 7:44 PM UTC

I have worked in two different kind of companies during summers while I was in highschool, a Japanese auto parts manufacturing company had a very interesting structure, from the President to the temp assembly line associate, all wore white uniforms when they arrived at work. Management offices were in middle of the factory floor completely accessible to any employee. Everyone sat in same cafeterias and enjoyed similar company perks. There was absolutely no segregation and the flow of ideas were amazing, problems got reported and were acted upon fast, it was very agile company. I really enjoyed working there and so did other employees.

The other company (auto parts manufacturer as well) had similar badge system as discussed in the article, employees with lowest ranking badge were considered the "lowest class", no one except their immediate supervisor talked to them and listened to them. This segregation meant they had no incentive to work intelligently or report problems. All they wanted to do was to do their jobs and get the hell out.

It was quite educating to work under the two contrasting management structure. The first one was a breath of fresh air and the second was very suffocating.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#342

Post by scotty79 » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 7:47 PM UTC

jcnnghm wrote: post #157

scotty79 wrote: post #108

It's a funny thing when secret rules you have never agreed to and are not the part of the law get you fired despite you complete honesty and openness. It has very totalitaristic look&feel when you have to be careful all the time so you always obey unknown rules, breaking of which might lead to severe consequences.

The secret rule that your employer may not want to pay you, allow you on-site, and provide you access to their resources while you film an exposé on their labor practices that could potentially open them to outside scrutiny, legal and otherwise. Especially as you try to paint them as racists when they ask what you're doing. They would have been justified for firing him for stupidity.

He was fired for talking to other employees (he secretly not supposed to) and acquiring gear and permision to film some of them and actually doing it (what he secretly not supposed to) but mainly about being honest and transparent about reasons for his curiosity.

You are right. He must have been a retard and as such he wasn't fit to do any job for Google contractor.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#343

Post by benmccann » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 7:48 PM UTC

sgentle wrote: post #93

guard-of-terra wrote: post #58

I think that many commenters are missing the point. The question isn't whether Google is goind anything strictly illegal. The question is whether Google is doing something what would be considered shady by a big part of Google employees; If so, how would Google acknowlege the situation; And then, how would they live thru this, with Googlers knowing that their own standards are in a serious mismatch with the actual be…

Yeah, I'm genuinely surprised by the tone here. I mean, clearly the things he wrote were a bit inflammatory, but it seems like most of the commenters have shockingly low standards for what constitutes a fair firing. Am I to expect that if you were working at a company and you brought an allegation of racism to your superiors, you should be fired because that allegation makes them uncomfortable or could lead to legal…

He didn't get fired for raising an issue with his superiors. He never raised an issue with his superiors at all. Instead he went about creating an inflammatory recording with a video camera in which he attempted to frame his company's client in a negative light.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#344

Post by neilk » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 7:49 PM UTC

pg wrote: post #329

neilk wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this is a typical arrangement that companies often make, why is it sensational? @yanw: I agree there's nothing wrong going on, and everyone is within their rights. What's wrong with taking a picture of it? And before you reply that all photography on campus is supposed to be discouraged, you're right, but in practice nobody enforces that policy if you're taking pictures of other parts of Google. There are tons of…

Sensationalist means describing routine and/or innocent things in a way that makes them seem like a bigger deal than they are. As you surely knew.

Well, we can disagree, but I was not being disingenuous.

I don't understand this attitude that (a) every company does this, there's nothing new here but (b) just videoing the parking lot is somehow an act on par with a Michael Moore muckraking job. It's one or the other.

I do agree it's totally routine, but it is a bit dissonant with Google's carefully crafted image as the happiest workplace on earth, and that makes it interesting. Having worked there I don't think of Google as a shining light, nor is it an evil conspiracy; there are a lot of aspects that are just normal and prosaic. I think for a lot of people, it would be interesting to know that minority and low-skill workers also have jobs at Google, and that there is boring drudge work to do at Google, and class divisions like any other place in America.

This doesn't mean Google is particularly evil or an exploiter, and I -- really, honestly! -- didn't see any such accusation in the original video, nor am I making one myself.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#345

Post by jlees » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 7:52 PM UTC

glenra wrote: post #180

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently Google feels that this situation does not fit the public image they want to project so the want to keep it under wraps. My opinion is that their behaviour isn't exactly evil and probably not unusual but it's uninspiring, uncreative and not up to standard with their approach to other matters. It's a missed opportunity. They have all these people together on the campus so why would they reinforce the existin…

> What does it cost to let everyone ride the same bus and have them eat in the same place? It's not clear why this contract agency runs on a different schedule than the rest of the company - 4am to 2:30 or whatever - maybe it's just traffic flow, or maybe they work a lot with a group in a different timezone. But the fact that they do run on a different schedule implies it could cost quite a lot to "let everyone ride…

There's also some deal in California with commuter tax benefits (I am nowhere near versant in this). That's why employees get free buses but contractors don't (as their company doesn't opt for the benefit, 'cause it costs money).

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#346

Post by yanw » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 7:56 PM UTC

sundae79 wrote: post #337

yanw wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the system they chose to keep things in check, I'm not aware of their inner works as I'm not their HR guy, even so color coding doesn't suggest a 'class system' (my gmail labels are color coded) it's a just a system to keep things in order.

I am aware of how electronic badges work and that should keep things in check. Worst case they could ask for their id. My point is the electronic system does keep things in order, so why the color? Maybe they should give violet badge to the 15 people working on the search engine. And similar color to different teams that way it is easier to identify.

Fail-safe? I don't know.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#347

Post by hieronymusN » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 7:58 PM UTC

flomo wrote: post #238

hieronymusN wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Employment may be at will, but the courts are full of lawsuits against employers for wrongful termination/dismissal. If you've ever dealt with a large HR dept you know that one of their main jobs is to prevent lawsuits brought/caused by employees.

"Wrongful termination" is largely a myth. I know a lot of educated professionals who believe they have the right to a "fair" termination, but except for very specific instances, it isn't the case, and these threats go nowhere. In most cases, unless there is a smoking gun, employers just sidestep the issue by targeting "layoffs", rather firing for cause. The bigger issue HR deals with is sexual harassment or discrimin…

You're absolutely correct about sexual harassment. Many years ago I had a temp job filing records in the legal dept. of the American Medical Association. They had a large filing room chock full of settlement documentation against doctors for sexual harassment.

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#348

Post by benmccann » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 8:03 PM UTC

strictfp wrote: post #43

tkahn6 wrote: post #13

This is literally one of the craziest things I have ever seen. Google is doing absolutely nothing wrong or unethical at all. The guy got fired because he started accusing Google of racism. Wow. Just wow. The sense of entitlement and self-righteousness is just mind blowing.

To me it's much more shocking to what great length you go to defend the rights of the company. It seems to me that freedom of speech should come before the right of firing at will. Or is your opinion that companies are about as souverign as states?

Both rights are fully in tact. A company or individual has a right to enter into and terminate contracts with anyone it wishes at any time. An individual has a right to say anything he wants. No one stopped him from saying anything or from posting a video to his blog for example. You seem to infer some other right that doesn't exist - the right to never be fired. But a law forcing such a measure would decrease the freedom of individuals to freely enter into and terminate contracts with each other. If both parties enter into a contract by their own free will, why should there be some law restricting their freedom to structure that contract in a manner that both parties agree to?

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#349

Post by Natsu » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 8:04 PM UTC

sundae79 wrote: post #337

yanw wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the system they chose to keep things in check, I'm not aware of their inner works as I'm not their HR guy, even so color coding doesn't suggest a 'class system' (my gmail labels are color coded) it's a just a system to keep things in order.

I am aware of how electronic badges work and that should keep things in check. Worst case they could ask for their id. My point is the electronic system does keep things in order, so why the color? Maybe they should give violet badge to the 15 people working on the search engine. And similar color to different teams that way it is easier to identify.

> My point is the electronic system does keep things in order, so why the color?

So that humans can also read the badges without a machine. The same reason they put a picture and your name on the badge, even though the machines don't need them.

Why would they make a badge that only the computer could understand?

Re: Workers Leaving the Googleplex

#350

Post by yanw » Sat, Apr 30, 2011, 8:05 PM UTC

georgieporgie wrote: post #286

yanw wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the author is clearly delusional. He doesn't seem to understand the difference between being an employee for a company that was hired by Google and being a Google employee and instead concocts this story about class warfare and injustice.

He doesn't seem to understand the difference between being an employee for a company that was hired by Google and being a Google employee He differentiated between being a red badge contractor and getting many of the on-site perquisites, versus being a yellow badge, who gets no (visible) benefits whatsoever. He also clearly states that Google leaned on his employer to fire him, not that Google fired him. I don't see…

Well then he doesn't seem to understand that contracts vary from one employer to another and that temp/contract workers are there to be fired and be hired again by someone else, it's the nature of the job.